Preliminary Hydrodynamic Modeling of the Steep Rock Pit Lakes, Atikokan, Ontario

Larissa Mikkelsen

A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the degree in Masters of Sciences Department of Geology Lakehead University

395 Wellington Street 395, rue Wellington Ottawa ON K1A0N4 Ottawa ON K1A0N4 Canada Canada Your file Votre reference ISBN: 978-0-494-84405-2

Our file Notre reference ISBN: 978-0-494-84405-2

NOTICE: AVIS: The author has granted a non L'auteur a accorde une licence non exclusive exclusive license allowing Library and permettant a la Bibliotheque et Archives Archives Canada to reproduce, Canada de reproduire, publier, archiver, publish, archive, preserve, conserve, sauvegarder, conserver, transmettre au public communicate to the public by par telecommunication ou par I'lnternet, preter, telecommunication or on the Internet, distribuer et vendre des theses partout dans le loan, distrbute and sell theses monde, a des fins commerciales ou autres, sur worldwide, for commercial or non support microforme, papier, electronique et/ou commercial purposes, in microform, autres formats. paper, electronic and/or any other formats.

The author retains copyright L'auteur conserve la propriete du droit d'auteur ownership and moral rights in this et des droits moraux qui protege cette these. Ni thesis. Neither the thesis nor la these ni des extraits substantiels de celle-ci substantial extracts from it may be ne doivent etre imprimes ou autrement printed or otherwise reproduced reproduits sans son autorisation. without the author's permission.

In compliance with the Canadian Conformement a la loi canadienne sur la Privacy Act some supporting forms protection de la vie privee, quelques may have been removed from this formulaires secondaires ont ete enleves de thesis. cette these.

While these forms may be included Bien que ces formulaires aient inclus dans in the document page count, their la pagination, il n'y aura aucun contenu removal does not represent any loss manquant. of content from the thesis. Canada/n iM Pit lakes are often a planned part of an open pit mine closure where the excavations are expected to flood and water quality is not an issue. Common environmental issues regarding pit lakes include their rebound rate, hydrodynamic behaviour and water quality. The water quality of pit lakes can be influenced by their hydrodynamics, for example overturn in a holomictic lake can transport dissolved oxygen down to submerged tailing resulting in the production of acid mine waters if sulphide minerals are present, or the unexpected overturn of a meromictic pit lake can bring stagnant, dissolved metal laden waters to surface that may be toxic to aquatic life.

Where water quality is of concern and pit lakes outflow into adjacent watersheds their behaviour can determine if noxious material will be brought to the surface and released. At the former

Steep Rock Iron Mines property near Atikokan, Ontario, three pit lakes are currently flooding and will eventually join to form a super pit lake before they outflow into the West Arm and subsequently Seine River system. Previous studies on two of the pit lakes, Caland and Hogarth, have shown that the pit lakes are meromictic and holomictic, respectively, and that both have elevated sulphate concentrations. The aim of this research was to: i) evaluate existing rebound models by modeling rebound and assessing which parameters exert the greatest influence on the rebound rate; and, ii) develop hydrodynamic models of Caland and Hogarth pit lakes to assess if their current limnology will change as rebound continues and they outflow into the West Arm.

Rebound models are constructed using two approaches and compared to the Ontario

Ministry of Natural Resources Regional Engineering model that accurately predicted water levels to 2011. The first rebound modeling approach uses two curves to model the stage-volume relationships, a hypsometric curve and a surface area versus elevation curve. The second approach fits an exponential curve to measured water elevations and then future water elevations are forecasted by extrapolation. Rebound Model 2B constructed following the first approach matched measured water elevations best for the two pit lakes and predicts 2010 measured water elevations better than the Regional Engineering model. Model 2B predicts that Caland will flow into Hogarth in 2070 and that the new Steep Rock pit lake will outflow into the West Arm in

2087, 18 years longer than predictions made by the Regional Engineering model. Based on the water balance parameter sensitivity analysis, the difference between this study's predictions and those of the Regional Engineering model is the result of different pit volume calculation methods. In this study's rebound models the stage-volume relationships for Hogarth are more accurate than for Caland, suggesting that in future work, at minimum, linear interpolation should be used to define the volume in Caland pit lake.

This study is the first to model the hydrodynamics of Caland and Hogarth pit lakes. The

Dynamic Reservoir Simulation Model (DYRESM) was used to: i) assess if it can accurately model the current pit lake conditions; and, ii) model the future conditions in Caland and Hogarth for when the pit lakes join and when they outflow to the West Arm. The model salinities are discussed to assess the future toxicity of the pit lakes. DYRESM simulations of current conditions accurately portray the observed limnological characteristics of Caland and Hogarth pit lakes, including: i) that Caland is meromictic and has a lower salinity relative to Hogarth; and, ii) that Hogarth develops a temporary meromix. Simulations of when the two pits join indicate that the freshwater lens in Caland will be maintained, but is thinner, and that Hogarth develops a meromix, which is maintained throughout the simulations. Simulations of when the pit lakes outflow into the West Arm indicate that Caland will maintained its upper freshwater lens and that a fresh water lens is only briefly present in Hogarth. In most cases, variations of the simulations for current and future pit lake conditions, including additional inflows, alteration of the inflow salinities, and the use of a slower rebound rate to define the DYRESM water balance, only produced minor changes in the simulation.

iii A linear trend between sulphate concentrations and salinity exists for water samples from

Caland and Hogarth. Based on this trend, the DYRESM salinity profiles suggest that the waters that outflow from Caland into Hogarth will have sulphate concentrations ranging from 0 mg/L to

100 mg/L and that waters that outflow from Hogarth will have sulphate concentrations ranging from 1700 mg/L to 1900 mg/L. In general, the sulphate concentrations in Caland are below maximum acceptable limit of all water quality standards while those in Hogarth exceed all water quality standards. These results suggest that the waters that outflow from the pit lakes will be toxic.

DYRESM can be used to simulate the future hydrodynamics of Caland and Hogarth pit lakes, however, future studies and field investigations should address some of the areas of uncertainty in the DYRESM simulations for Caland and Hogarth pit lakes, including constraining seep and groundwater volumes and chemistry, on site meteorological monitoring and measurement of the light extinction coefficient.

iv ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

A sincere thanks is due to Dr. Andrew Conly for assistance, instruction and constructive criticism. Rob Purdon and Brian Jackson for their help and insight into the study site, Lindsay

Moore for assistance in the field, Dr. Mary Louise Hill for her support and encouragement. A special thanks to my husband, family and friends for your support, encouragement and days spent watching Leif.

v TABLE OF CONTENTS

Title page i Abstract ii Acknowledgements v Table of Contents vi List of Figures viii List of Tables xii List of Appendices xiii

Chapter 1: Introduction 1 1.1 General Introduction Regarding the Hydrodynamics of Pit Lakes 1 1.2 Scope of Study 7

Chapter 2: Background Information 10 2.1 Location 10 2.2 Geologic Setting 10 2.3 Hydrologic Setting 18 2.4 Previous Research 22 2.4.1 Previous Rebound Models 26

Chapter 3: Rebound and Water Balance Models 29 3.1 General Introduction and Scope of Work 29 3.2 Conceptual Model 30 3.3 Stage - Volume Relationships 32 3.4 Water Balance 36 3.5 Determination of Meteorological Parameters 38 3.5.1 Precipitation 38 3.5.2 Evaporation 43 3.6 Rebound Models and Calibration 46 3.6.1 Models 46 3.6.2 Calibration 47 3.7 Sensitivity Analysis 48 3.8 Results 49 3.8.1 Summary of This Study's Predictions 49 3.8.2 Comparison of This Study's Predictions to Measured Water Elevations 52 3.8.3 Comparison of This Study's and the Regional Engineering Model's Predictions 53 3.8.4 Sensitivity Analysis Results 55 3.9 Discussion 60 3.9.1 Study Results 60 3.9.2 Sensitivity Analysis 66 3.9.3 Model Limitations 69

vi 3.10 Conclusions 71

Chapter 4: Hydrodynamic Modeling 72 4.1 Description of the Limnological Program DYRESM 73 4.2 Description of the Limnological Program DYRESM 74 4.3 Description of DYRESM Input Files and Their Creation 74 4.3.1 Configuration 75 4.3.2 Physical Data and Lake Morphometry 76 4.3.3 Initial Profile 77 4.3.4 Meteorological Data 77 4.3.5 Stream Inflow 79 4.3.6 Withdrawals 80 4.3.7 Parameters 81 4.4 Simulated Scenarios 81 4.4.1 Scenario 1 - Current Conditions 81 4.4.2 Scenario 2: Future Conditions When Pit Lakes Join 84 4.4.3 Scenario 3: Future Conditions When Pit Lake Outflow to the West Arm 85 4.5 Results 86 4.5.1 Scenario 1 86 4.5.2 Scenario 2 95 4.5.3 Scenario 3 98 4.6 Discussion 105 4.6.1 Study results 105 4.6.2 Implications for the Future Toxicity of Caland and Hogarth Ill 4.6.3 Limitations of the study and future work 117 4.7 Conclusions 123

Chapter 5: General Conclusions 126

References 129

Appendices 136

vii LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1.1: Map showing the four open pits on the former Steep Rock Iron Mines property. (Base map from Google Earth August 24, 2005) 4

Figure 1.2: Map showing original Steep Rock Lake shoreline, current pit lake shorelines, surrounding lakes and key water control structures. Based on GIS data available from the Ministry of Natural Resources 5

Figure 1.3: Map showing water flow paths before and after the Seine River and Western Diversions. Based on GIS data available from the Ministry of Natural Resources 6

Figure 2.1: Location of study site (Stott et al., 2007). The former Steep Rock Iron Mines site is located on the southern border of the Wabigoon Terrane adjacent to the Quetico Subprovince 11

Figure 2.2: Geological cross-section of Errington pit from Kusky and Hudleston (1999). The geology of Hogarth and Caland pits is similar to that of Errington pit except that there is a greater proporation of the Pyritic Member in Hogarth pit 12

Figure 2.3: A schematic east-west cross-section of Caland (East Arm) and Hogarth Pit (Middle Arm) Lakes (from Sowa et al., 2001). Diagram shows approximate 2011 pit lake water elevations, original lake level and water elevations in the Seine River, West Arm, Fairweather Lake (Southeast Arm) and the Rawn 22

Figure 2.4: Comparison of previous predictions made for rebound Caland pit lake to measured water elevations 27

Figure 2.5: Comparison of previous predictions made for rebound in Hogarth pit lake to measured water elevations 28

Figure 3.1: The hypsometric curve for Caland pit. The hypsometric curve is shown by the black line and the points are the determined accumulated volume with elevation 34

Figure 3.2: The hypsometric curve for Hogarth pit. The hypsometric curve is shown by the black line and the points are the determined accumulated volume with elevation 34

Figure 3.3: The elevation - surface area curve for Caland pit. The elevation - surface area curve is shown by the black line and the points correspond to the measured surface area at each ontour interval of the pit 35

Figure 3.4: The elevation - surface area curve for Hogarth pit. The elevation - surface area curve is shown by the black line and the points correspond to the measured surface area at each contour interval of the pit 35

Figure 3.5: Google image of weather station locations used in this study and that of Heineselmen (1996). Weather stations marked by yellow flags are stations with 25 km of Atikokan; blue viii flags are stations within 200 km to West of Atikokan; green are stations used by Heineselmen (1996); and, the orange flag is the Thunder Bay weather station 40

Figure 3.6: Comparison of monthly precipitation distributions of the index stations to the Atikokan weather station used in the normal inverse ratio method of estimating precipitation 41

Figure 3.7 Comparison of estimate annual precipitation to measured annual precipitation from 1978 to 2003 at the Atikokan weather station 43

Figure 3.8: Graph showing measured and estimated monthly evaporation rates 46

Figure 3.9: Graph showing the results of the rebound models for Caland and measured water levels from 1979 to 2011 50

Figure 3.10: Graph showing the results of the rebound models for Flogarth and measured water levels from 1979 to 2011 50

Figure: 3.11: Comparison of measured water elevations to this study's rebound model predictions for Caland and to those of the Regional Engineering model 54

Figure: 3.12: Comparison of measured water elevations to this study's rebound model predictions for Hogarth and to those of the Regional Engineering model 55

Figure 3.13: Graph of the sensitivity analysis for precipitation. The predictions shown start in 2006, when the average precipitation rate replaces measured values in the water balance calculations, and end when the predicted water level for each model is equal to or greater than 394 m 57

Figure 3.14: Graph of the sensitivity analysis for runoff. The predictions shown start in 2004, when the calibration period ends in the water balance calculations, and end when the predicted water level for each model is equal to or greater than 394 m 58

Figure 3.15: Graph of the sensitivity analysis for evaporation. The predictions shown start in 2004, when the calibration period ends in the water balance calculations, and end when the predicted water level for each model is equal to or greater than 394 m 59

Figure 3.16: Graph of the sensitivity analysis for the net groundwater influx. The predictions shown start in 2004, when the calibration period ends in the water balance calculations, and end when the predicted water level for each model is equal to or greater than 394 m 59

Figure 3.17: Images showing the irregularities in the shape of Caland and Hogarth pit lakes. (A) Contours of Caland and Hogarth pit lakes at a 10 m interval from 190 masl to 390 masl. (B) Aerial photograph of Caland pit lake taken in 1982, showing the irregular shape of the lake. 62

Figure 4.1: Temperature (°C), salinity (psu) and density (kg/m ) profiles for scenario 1 simulations lClb and 1CV2 for Caland pit lake. Aside from the salinity at the bottom of the pit increasing earlier in 1CV2 then lClb there are no significant differences in profiles .... 89 ix Figure 4.2: Temperature (°C), salinity (psu) and density (kg/m3) profiles for scenario 1 simulations lClc and lCld for Caland pit lake. The profile for simulation lCle is identical to lCld and is not shown. Relative to lClb, lClc and 1CId do not have a plume in the layer with the highest salinity and the salinity at the bottom of the pit does not change with time 90

Figure 4.3: Temperature (°C), salinity (psu) and density (kg/m3) profiles for scenario 1 simulations lHlb and 1H3 for Hogarth pit lake. The salinity profile for lHlb shows a plume and that of 1H3 does not 92

Figure 4.4: Temperature (°C), salinity (psu) and density (kg/m3) profiles for scenario 1 simulations 1H MSGW and 1H HSGW for Hogarth pit lake. Relative to lHlb the density at the bottom of the pit is greater in simulations 1HMSGW and 1H HSGW. Simulation 1H MSGW shows a plume in the salinity profile and 1H HSGW does not 93

Figure 4.5: Temperature (°C), salinity (psu) and density (kg/m3) profiles for scenario 1 simulations 2C2 and 2C2 for Caland pit lake. Relative to simulation lClb, the salinity in the pit lake is lower in simulations 2C1 and 2C2 and the low salinity surface layers are thinner 96

Figure 4.6: Temperature (°C), salinity (psu) and density (kg/m3) profiles for scenario 2 simulations 2Cv2 and 2Cv3 for Caland pit lake. There are no significant differences between profiles for simulations 2Cv2 and 2Cv3 compared to 2C1 except for a slightly thicker fresh water lens in the salinity profile for 2Cv3 97

Figure 4.7: Temperature (°C), salinity (psu) and density (kg/m3) profiles for scenario 2 simulations 2H1 and 2Hlb for Hogarth pit lake. Relative to simulation lHlb the salinity profiles show a permanent fresh water layer at the surface. Simulation 2H1 has a plume in the salinity profile and simulation 2Hlb does not 100

Figure 4.8: Temperature (°C), salinity (psu) and density (kg/m3) profiles for scenario 2 simulations 2H2 and 2H3 for Hogarth pit lake. Relative to simulation 2H1, there are no significant differences in profiles 101

Figure 4.9: Temperature (°C), salinity (psu) and density (kg/m3) profiles for scenario 2 simulations 2Hv2 and 2Hv3 for Hogarth pit lake. Relative to simulation 2H1, there are no significant differences in profiles 102

Figure 4.10: Temperature (°C), salinity (psu) and density (kg/m3) profiles for scenario 3 simulations 3C_lout and 3Cv3_lout for Caland. Relative to simulation 2C1, the salinity in the pit lake is lower and the fresh water layers are thinner in simulations 3C 1 out and 3Cv3 lout 103

Figure 4.11: Temperature (°C), salinity (psu) and density (kg/m3) profiles for scenario 3 simulations 3Hv2 and 3Hv3 for Hogarth. Relative to simulation 2H1, the permanent fresh water layers at the surface of the pit lake no longer exist in simulations 3Hv2 and 3Hv3. 104

x Figure 4.12: Plot of salinity versus sulphate for all water samples collected from Caland and Hogarth pits and seeps between 1998 and 2009. Caland pit lake samples are represented by squares, black for seeps and grey for lake samples. Hogarth pit lake samples are represent by triangle, black for seeps and grey for lake samples. The black line shows the linear relationship between sulphate and salinity and has a correlation coefficient of 0.9304 113

Figure 4.13: Comparison of measured salinity for Caland (left) and DYRESM predicted salinity for Caland (right). Note that the measured salinity predictions do not extend to the bottom of the pit lake but the DYRESM predicted values do. Measured values are similar above 100 m depth compared to layer 40 in the DYRESM predicted values. At about layer 35 DYRESM predicts a salinity decrease from the spring to fall. Measured values are derived conductivity measurements from Godwin 2010 115

Figure 4.14: Comparison of measured salinity in Hogarth (left) and DYRESM predicted salinity for Hogarth (right). Measured values indicate a much lower salinity at the surface and bottom of the pit lake in comparison the DYRESM predicted values. DYRESM predicts higher surface salinities in the fall compared to the spring and summer profiles which are similar. Measured values were derived from conductivity measurements from Godwin (2010) 116 LIST OF TABLES

Table 1.1: Timeline of mine opening and closures on the Steep Rock Iron Range 4

Table 2.1: Summary of previous rebound model predictions 27

Table 3.1: List of weather stations used in the estimation of missing precipitation values from the National Climate Data and Information Archive 40

Table 3.2: Rebound model predictions for when Caland and Hogarth join and outflow into the West Arm 49

Table 3.3: The net groundwater influx values calculated during each of the models respective calibration period 49

Table 4.1: Summary of DYRESM simulations for Caland pit lake 82

Table 4.2: Summary of DYRESM simulations for Hogarth pit lake 82

xii LIST OF APPENDICES

Appendix I: Pit Lake Volume Calculations 136

Appendix II: Estimating Precipitation Rates Using the Inverse Ratio Method 139

Appendix III: Estimating Evaporation Using the Penman and Thomwaite Equation 141

Appendix IV: Water Balance and Rebound Model Results 143

Appendix V: Sensitivity Analysis Results 162

Appendix VI: Rebound Model - Pit Geometry Modeled Using Linear Interpolation 165

Appendix VII: Example DYRESM Input Files 175

Appendix VIII: Glossary of Terms 196

xm 1 Chapter 1: Introduction

1.1 General Introduction Regarding the Hydrodynamics of Pit Lakes

Natural water systems can be drastically altered by mining activities. The environmental impacts of mining activities on natural water systems can be categorized accordingly: i) the

physical impacts on natural water systems produced by mineral extraction; ii) the inflow of water

into active workings; iii) dewatering methods and their design; iv) impacts of dewatering in

terms of quantity and quality; v) hydrologic behaviour of rock piles, backfill, and tailings

impoundments; vi) physical and chemical changes associated with mine abandonment and the

rebound process; and, vii) the long-term hydrologic behaviour of abandoned mine site including,

but not limited to, longevity of pollution, contamination migration, discharge from flooded mines

and physical and chemical dynamics of pit lakes (Younger et al., 2002). Where mine workings extend below the water table, dewatering is required during operation to keep excavations,

underground workings or open pits, dry. Upon cessation of dewatering rebound occurs where

ground and surface waters gradually flood mine voids (Younger et al., 2002). Rebound in open

pit mining operations results in the formation of a pit lake.

Common environmental issues with respect to pit lakes include the long-term hydrologic

behaviour, the rebound rate and water quality. The long-term hydrologic behaviour of pit lakes

depends on whether or not the bottom of an open pit extends below the water table. In general a

pit lake acts as a regional groundwater sink. Where the floor of open pit mine excavation is

below the water table, the pit will gradually flood until the pit lake surface elevation equals that

of the groundwater table (Younger et al., 2002). In such cases, pit lakes are often a planned part

of the mine after use if no water quality issues are expected. The length of time it will take for an

open pit to completely flood, also known as the rebound rate, depends on the volume of the void

to be filled and the water balance. Most pit lakes only lose water via evaporation and lateral 2 groundwater flow, but some pit lakes have surface outlets. Two issues often arise with respect to pit lake water quality. First, water released from the pit lake into downstream watersheds may have chemical constituents exceeding water quality guidelines. Secondly, the disposal of waste rock and tailings in the pit lake may result in the migration of potentially toxic material up to the lake surface (Hamblin et al., 1999).

Unlike natural lakes, the depth to width ratio of most pit lakes is high, which has important implications for lake dynamics. The high depth to width ratio of pit lakes promotes three-layer density stratification where the bottom layer (monimolimnion) is not involved in seasonal overturn resulting in meromictic stratification (Younger et al., 2002). Where meromictic conditions exist the monimolimnion remains stagnant. The unexpected overturn of a meromictic lake can result in acute environmental impacts (Castendyk and Webster-Brown,

2007). The upper layers (mixolimnion and chemolimnion) of a lake can become oxygen depleted due to mixing with the stagnant bottom waters (monimolimnion) and any dissolved or suspended constituents. Where sulphide minerals exist in wall rocks or stored tailings, redox conditions can

influence the production of acid mine waters (Castendyk and Webster-Brown, 2007). Typically,

waters with low pH and high concentrations of ecotoxic metals occur for a brief time during pit filling and a short period thereafter (Shevenell, 2000a). A pit lake is likely to remain acidic when

the terminal water elevation is in contact with sulphur rich rock (Bowell et al., 1998). In contrast,

a pit lake water column may turn over completely with seasonal overturn resulting in holomictic

stratification (Younger et al., 2002). Where holomictic conditions exist, seasonal overturn can

transport dissolved oxygen to submerged mine tailings and can promote oxidation of sulphide-

bearing material is present (Younger et al., 2002). For these reasons it is important to understand

the likely dynamics of a pit lake before developing a long-term management strategy. However,

before the affect of a pit lake on regional hydrology or water quality can be assessed, a

knowledge of the fluxes and volumes of water entering and exiting the pit lake is required. 3 In theory predicting the formation of pit lakes is straightforward and can be addressed by assuming that groundwater inflow will decrease steadily as the pit fills. At the start of rebound, immediately after cessation of dewatering, the groundwater inflow rate will equal the final dewatering rate and once rebound is complete the groundwater inflow will equal the sum of evaporative losses plus any groundwater outflow (Younger et al, 2002). In practice the prediction of pit lake formation is complicated by local site conditions that influence the components of the total water balance (Younger et al, 2002). Unfortunately, there has not been a significant amount of work done to address the prediction of pit lake rebound rates. However, models have been made that reproduce observed pit filling rates and may be applicable to the prediction of future pit filling rates (e.g., Capper, 1978; MNR, 1986; Shevenell, 2000a).

The former Steep Rock Iron Mines property located approximately 5 km north of

Atikokan, Ontario, provides an excellent opportunity to study the formation of pit lakes. A series of mines operated on the property from 1944 to 1979 (Fig. 1.1 and Table 1.1). Open pit mining proved to be more economic than underground mining due to the complex nature of the local geology and heavy groundwater inflow (Taylor, 1978). The Steep Rock Iron Range ore bodies were located beneath the former Steep Rock Lake. The development of open pit mines on the

Steep Rock Iron Range required what was the first ever water diversion in Canadian mining history and altered approximately 259 km2 of the Seine River watershed in order to isolate and drain portions of Steep Rock Lake (Taylor, 1978; Fig. 1.2). The Seine River and Western

Diversions, along with other water control systems, served to isolate Steep Rock Lake from the

Seine River system (Fig. 1.3). The open pit mines were mined to their economic depth of approximately 400 m. Upon the cessation of mining activities in 1979, the open pits have been gradually flooding from runoff, precipitation and groundwater inflows. Between 1979 and 2004 there were four pit lakes (Hogarth, South Roberts, Errington and Caland; Figure 1.1). 4

Figure 1.1: Map showing the four open pits on the former Steep Rock Iron Mines property. (Base map from Google Earth, August 24, 2005).

Table 1.1: Timeline of mine opening and closures on the Steep Rock Iron Range

Year(s) Mine Openings and Closures 1939- 1940 • Attempted underground mining of Steep Rock Iron Range fails due to high water inflow 1944 • Errington Open Pit opens • Hogarth Open Pit opens 1953 • Cessation of mining at economic limit of Errington Open Pit 1956 • Errington Underground opens 1958 • Hogarth Underground shaft is sunk and pre-production work complete but project is abandoned 1960 • Caland Open Pit opens 1961 • Cessation of mining at economic limit of Hogarth Open Pit • Roberts Open Pit opens 1964 • Errington Underground closed due to high costs associated with complex geology, support required limited drift size, and grade control issues 1971 • Errington Underground reopened • Cessation of mining at economic limit of Roberts Pit 1972 • Errington Underground closed for same reasons as before 1974 • Hogarth Open Pit expanded and brought back into production • Cessation of mining at economic limit of Hogarth Open Pit 1978 • Environmental Plan is completed by Steep Rock Iron Mines 1979 • Cessation of mining at economic limit of Caland Open Pit 1985 • Steep Rock Iron Mines applies to surrender mining claims 1986 • Steep Rock Iron Mines application for surrender of mining claims is accepted Information taken from Steep Rock Men and the Mines by Taylor (1978) and from Report on the Surrender of Mining Claims By Steep Rock Resources Inc., Steep Rock Lake Atikokan District by the Ministry of Natural Resources (1986). 5

Legend 2011 Pit lake shoreline — Original shoreline pre-1943 mmm Dclffl (1) Wagita Bay Dam (2) Narrows Dam (3) West Arm Dams (4) Faireweather Dam (5) Hardy Dam it; (6) Marmion Block Dams Raft Lake

Finlayson Lake Marmion Lake

A*"**'* f n-a :wm I*

- ' IT West Arm Rawn & Hogarth Auxiliary ^ Faireweather Rawn Highland Lake Reservoirs Lake 3000 m

Legend ) Original Siene River Flow Path

Seine River Diversion {1943) Western Diversion (1952)

EskerCut

East Arm

South West Ar East Middle Arm Arm it

3000 m

Figure 1.3: Map showing water flow paths before and after the Seine River and Western Diversions. Based on GIS data available from the Ministry of Natural Resources.

Mine closure studies for Steep Rock Iron Mines Ltd. determined that all acid mine drainage that occurs on the property would flow into the pits and be neutralized by carbonate wall-rock and not require treatment (Capper, 1978). Without any intervention the Caland and Hogarth pit lakes are expected to gradually flood until they eventually join, forming one large lake, before 7 decanting into the West Arm Retention Basin and entering the Seine River System. During the surrender of mining claims, the Ministry of Natural Resources produced a rebound model for

Caland and Hogarth. The projected water levels up to the year 2011 have proven to be accurate with respect to observed water levels (MNR, 1986). A later rebound model by Vancook (2002) provided water level predictions further into the future but this model has recently been called into question by Jackson (2007) because of its assumption that the pit lake water elevation will increase linearly with time.

McNaughton (2001), Gould (2008) and Godwin (2010) studied the limnology of Caland and Hogarth pit lakes. Although in close proximity the two pit lakes have been observed to behave differently, Caland pit lake is meromictic and Hogarth pit lake appears to be temporarily meromictic. The differences in stratification have been attributed to the differences in the amount of fresh water input and the greater amount of pyritic material present in the ore zones mined in

Hogarth pit (McNaughton, 2001; Godwin, 2010). Over time the rebound process will change the dynamics of the lakes, specifically the inflows and outflows, as Caland and Hogarth gradually flood the lake basin of the former Steep Rock Lake. However, to date no studies have been done to model the hydrodynamics of the Caland and Hogarth pit lakes.

1.2 Scope of Study

The aim of this research was: i) evaluate existing rebound models through remodeling rebound and assess which parameters exhibit the greatest control on rebound rates; and ii) develop hydrodynamic models of Caland and Hogarth pit lakes in order to assess if their current limnology will change as rebound continues and they outflow into the West Arm. Analytical rebound and water balance models are created for Caland and Hogarth pit lakes in order to extend water elevation predictions into the future. A number of different rebound models are made using different prediction methods and calibration methods. The model that best matches 8 measured water levels was used to conduct a sensitivity analysis designed to investigate the influence of individual parameters on the rebound model results. The selected model was also used to define simulation inputs in the hydrodynamic model including: the volume of inflows and withdrawls, and the initial water surface heights in the pit lakes.

Previous rebound models for Caland and Hogarth include: Capper (1978), MNR (1986),

Vancook (2005) and Jackson (2007). Of the four studies, that of the MNR (1986) has proven to be reliable, however, it only made water level prediction until 2015. Currently the Caland and

Hogarth pit lakes are filling independently of each other (Godwin, 2010). Since the reliable water level predictions are only available until 2015, well before the pit lakes join, the rebound model in this study will extend water level predictions into the future in order to determine Hogarth's water level when Caland reaches 385 m, and the water balance will be used to define volumes of water entering the pit lakes in the hydrodynamic models.

This study is the first to attempt to conduct hydrodynamic modeling of Caland and

Hogarth pit lakes. An understanding of the future hydrodynamics of Caland and Hogarth pit lakes is important because of the implications that lake dynamics can have on outflow water quality when the joined Caland-Hogarth pit lake eventually spills into West Arm. The hydrodynamic model Dynamic Reservoir Simulation Model (DYRESM) by Imberger and

Patterson (1981) and by the Centre for Water Research at the University of Western Australia

(www.cwr.uwa.edu.ca) was used to establish hydrodynamic models of Caland and Hogarth pit lakes in order to assess if the salinity, density and temperature profiles of the pit lakes change at key times during the rebound process. Of specific interest was whether or not DYRESM can accurately simulate current conditions in the Caland and Hogarth pit lakes and if the stratification of the two lakes will change when the two pit lakes join and outflow. 9 Rebound models and hydrodynamic models of pit lakes should be an essential component of the pit lake management strategy especially where future water quality is of concern. At Steep

Rock, the quality of the waters that will outflow from the pit lakes is of concern since both pit lakes contain high concentrations of sulphate. The current the sulphate concentrations in Caland range between 200 mg/L and 500 mg/L and Hogarth between 1200 mg/L and 1900 mg/L

(McNaughton, 2001; Gould, 2008; Godwin, 2010; Shankie, 2011). The Canadian Drinking

Water Guidelines recommend that sulphate concentrations in drinking water should not exceed

500 mg/1 while the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Secondary Maximum Contaminant

Level (SMCL) is at or below 250 mg/L (EPA, 2003; Health Canada, 2010). Rebound and hydrodynamics models should be a component of the pit lake management strategy and of environmental assessments regarding the future use of the Steep Rock property because the pit lakes will outflow into the Seine River which connects to a number of popular fishing lakes and because the Ontario Government has accepted proposals for the future use of the site to process iron ore and dispose of other mine tailings which will influence water chemistry on the property

(http://www.bendinglakeiron.com/MEDIA%20-%20Rehabilitating%20 The%20

Steep%20Rock%20Mine%20Site.pdf, Accessed: December 6, 2010). Furthermore, this study's rebound model water level predictions may help validate the use of analytical methods to estimate pit lake rebound rates by comparing predicted water levels to future measured levels, and to validate the use of DYRESM to model the pit lake hydrodynamics. 10 Chapter 2: Background Information

2.1 Location

Steep Rock Resource Inc. and Caland Ore mining claims encompassed an area of 52 km2 including the entire area of Steep Rock Lake (MNR, 1986). Steep Rock Lake was located about

5 km north of Atikokan, Ontario (48°48'N, 91°39'W) and is about 208 km west of Thunder Bay,

Ontario.

2.2 Geologic Setting

The Archean iron ore body mined by Steep Rock Iron Mines Ltd. and Caland Ore Ltd. is located on the southern border of the Wabigoon subprovince and adjacent to the Quetico subprovince of the Superior Province (Fig. 2.1). The Wabigoon subprovince is a volcano- plutonic subprovince consisting of greenstone belts that are bordered and intruded by felsic plutonic rocks (Card and Ciesielski, 1986). The Quetico subprovince consists primarily of metasedimentary rocks. The Quetico and Seine River Faults mark the border between the

Wabigoon and Quetico subprovinces (Card and Ciesielski, 1986). The east-trending Wabigoon-

Quetico boundary separates metavolcanic rocks to the north from the metasedimentary rocks to the south and has been attributed to subduction-related accretion of the Quetico sedimentary prism against the Wabigoon volcanic arc about 2695 Ma (Stone et al., 1992). A number of other faults including the Atikokan Fault, Samuels Fault and Bartley Fault run through the Steep Rock area (Stone et al., 1992). The Steep Rock Lake area shows indications of multiple periods of metamorphism, metasomatism and deformation. The main periods of metamorphism correlate with the Kenoran, Hudsonian, and Grenville orogenies. The main types of metasomatism that occurred in the area include carbonatization, quartz veins, silicification, iron-sulphur metasomatism, spilitization, and hydration (Shklanka, 1972). Island L Domain Oxford-! Jerrane

North * Caribou Terrane

> Rivef""^« Subprovinci Wtnnipi

Wawa " SubproMnEC

Major terrane Greenstone Major boundaries belts Lakes

Figure 2.1: Geologic location of study site (Stott et al., 2007). The former Steep Rock Iron Mines site is located on the southern border of the Wabigoon Terrane adjacent to the Quetico Subprovince. 12

"1400

1000 «

/ Legend Witch Bay Formation m|p*Ty:le. grsry Jolifte Ore Zone Wagita Formation | | Pynte Memuer IV.i1- r flows & s's f/nl=: & ul'a'TOli-; my utile •&>i?l n !e Mamua' Marmion Complex

l'i1erm»d.ato la ta5Bc luff [ j Pant Rx< Memc Dismal Ash Rock Formation Mosher Formation • • y Fajil Figure 2.2: Geological cross-section of Errington pit (from Kusky and Hudleston 1999). The geology of Hogarth and Caland pits is similar to that of Errington pit except that there is a greater proportion of the Pyritic Member in Hogarth pit. 13 Study site geology consists of the Marmion Gneiss complex and the Steep Rock greenstone belt. The Marmion Gneiss Complex is a composite unit that includes mafic tonalitic gneiss, a leucocratic tonalite containing amphobolized remnants of mafic volcanics, several units of felsic and intermediate tuffaceous rock that are all intruded by granodiorite and gabbro dikes (Stone et al., 1992). The Steep Rock Group overlies the Marmion Gneiss Complex and consists of the

Wagita Formation, Mosher Carbonate Formation, Jolliffe Ore Zone, Dismal Ash Rock, Witch

Bay Formation (Fig. 2.2; Joliffe, 1955; Shklanka, 1972; Stone et al., 1992; Kusky and Hudleston,

1999). The Wagita Formation overlies the Marmion Gneiss Complex and is a discontinuous conglomerate, sandstone sequence consisting of pooly sorted angular fragments of granite and mafic dike material passing upwards into a conglomerate with well-rounded clasts of the same rock types (Joliffe, 1955). The Wagita Formation is up to 150 m thick and is interpreted as alluvial fan deposits on fault scarps or low-lying areas on the Marmion Complex (Shklanka,

1972). The contact between the Marmion Complex and the Wagita Formation has been interpreted to be conformable marking a change from volcanism to sedimentary deposition

(Kusky and Hudleston, 1999). Shklanka (1972) proposed the Steep Rock Group to be fault bounded. However, other authors have interpreted the contact to be an unconformity between the Marmion Complex and the Wagita Formation (Jolliffe, 1966; Wilks and Nesbitt, 1988; Stone et al., 1992).

The Wagita Formation is overlain by the Mosher Carbonate Formation, a sequence up to

500 m thick that represents a shallow ocean environment. The Mosher Carbonate Formation ranges from well banded, to massive, to brecciated, and shows marked changes in chemical composition. The carbonate is made up of calcite, ankerite, and dolomite with minor amounts of cherty layers. Stromatolites are common through the formation (Wilks and Nisbet, 1988). Small- scale stromatolites exist throughout the formation and are best formed near the bottom of the

Mosher Carbonate Formation. The most common small-scale morphology is Stratifera-like 14 stromatolities with laminae from 0.5 mm to 4 cm thick and that can be traced up the formation into Irregularia -like stromatolites. The Irregularia -like stromatolites are pseudo-columnar and laterally linked with wavy-laminae 0.5 cm to 3.5 cm and are 2 cm to 10 cm high and 5 cm to 15 cm in basal diameter. The upper 50 m of the formation is dominated by large-scale stromatolites that form continuous horizons. The large-scale stromatolites are domed structures ~ 3 m in diameter to more tabular bodies up to 5 m or more long (Wilks and Nisbet, 1988). Brecciated units have been associated to fault zones (Shklanka, 1972; Stone et al., 1992, Kusky and

Hudleston, 1999).

The Jolliffe Ore zone overlies the Mosher Carbonate Formation and is a 100 m to 400 m thick iron formation that consists of three members, the lower Magniferous Paint, the Middle

Geothite, and the upper Pyrite members. The lower Magniferous Paint member is 100 m to 300 m thick and is enriched in manganese and contains large blocks of weathered carbonate (Stone et al., 1992). The Magniferous Paint member has a sharp but irregular contact with the Mosher

Carbonate Formation believed to represent a paleosoil on karst topography remaining from the subareal exposure of the Mosher Carbonate Formation (Shklanka, 1972; Kusky and Hudleston,

1999; Stone et al., 2000). The middle Goethite member overlies the lower Magniferous Paint member and is distinguished by an increase in the iron/manganese ratio (Stone et al., 1992). The middle Goethite member is 50 m to 100 m thick and occurs as brecciated masses and as well- banded iron formation. The middle Goethite member is an iron formation made up of more then

90% goethite and hematite with remaining portion of the rock made up of quartz and kaolin in a lighter coloured matrix of gibbsite and kaolinite (Shklanka, 1972). Near the top of the middle

Geothite member there is an irregular material called "buckshot" ore that is made up of pisolites and fragments of hematite in a lighter coloured matrix of gibbsite and kaolinite (Shklanka, 1972).

Sporadically overlying the Goethite Member is the conformable upper Pyritic member. The majority of the pyrite is contained in well-bedded iron formation that resembles the well-banded 15 iron formation of the middle Geothite member except for the increased pyrite content (Shklanka,

1972).

Stratigraphically overlying the Jolliffe Ore zone is the Dismal Ashrock Formation. The contact between these two formations is marked by a brittle fault (Stone et al., 1992). The

Dismal Ashrock Formation is 50 m to 400 m thick and consists of ductily deformed komatiitic pyroclastic rocks, including tuff, lapilli tuff, and lapilli-stone, collectively called ashrock, and a lesser component of pillowed lava flows (Stone et al., 1992). Lapilli tuffs are the dominant rock type and are made up of poorly sorted fragments with respect to size and are rounded to subrounded. The texture of these rocks is similar to modern day tuff cones suggesting a similar

style of volcanism may have occurred as the hot komatiitic magma came into contact with the

low-lying Mosher Carbonate and Jolliffe Ore zone Formations (Stone et al., 1992). The contact

between the Dismal Ashrock and the Witch Bay volcanic rocks is a regional scale shear zone

(Kusky and Hudleston, 1999). Shklanka (1972) identified the Atikokan Fault between the

Dismal Ashrock and Witch Bay Formation.

The Witch Bay Formation is made up of mafic with minor felsic metavolcanic rocks and

rare metasedimentary rocks. The Witch Bay Formation is at least 1 km thick and extends up to 5

km thick and represents subaqueous volcanism (Stone et al., 2000).

Kusky and Hudleston (1999) interpreted the Mosher Carbonate to be a shallow water

carbonate platform that formed along the margin of the Marmion Complex at approximately 3.0

Ga. At the time, the Marmion Complex was part of a larger regional belt of arc type plutons and

volcanic rocks in the Central Wabigoon subprovince and is thought to be similar to La Grand

River and Sachigo subprovinces. It is proposed that these different terrains may have been

continuous until dextral strike-slip faulting occurred through the Superior Province from 2.9 to

2.7 Ga, and that the Steep Rock greenstone belt is part of a shallow-water subsiding arc terrain

that was ripped apart (Kusky and Hudleston, 1999). Mafic metavolcanic rocks may have 16 overlain the ashrock within a poorly constrained time interval, up to 300 million years in length, the contact of which is locally folded and faulted (Stone et al., 1992). Alternatively, the mafic metavolcanic rocks of the Witch Bay Formation could be allochthonous and are different in age with respect to the ashrock and shifted into position by the Atikokan Fault implying that all contacts between the ashrock and metavolcanic rocks are faulted (Stone et al., 1992). The stratigraphic relationship between the Dismal Ashrock Formation and metavolcanic rocks is unclear due to their tectonized and poorly exposed nature of their contacts and depends on the interpretation of the contact between these two formations, the Dismal Ashrock Formation and

Witch Bay Formation (Stone et al., 1992).

The Pleistocene surface deposits in the Steep Rock area consist of glacial moraine, glaciolacustine and rare aeolian deposits on a Precambrian peneplane (Stone, 1992). Ground moraine till is typically 1 m, but is thicker in topographic depressions. The till is unsorted, poorly stratified and composed of pebbles and cobbles in a variable sand, silt and clay matrix.

There are two recessional moraines, the Steep Rock and Eagle-Finlayson that cross the Steep

Rock area. Both trend east-south-east and are parallel to each other (Shklanka, 1972). The portion of the Steep Rock moraine that crosses the study site is an irregular, interrupted belt of elongate hills, hummocks and gravel flats. Glacier movement over the study scored out the

Joliffe Ore zone and deposited iron bearing gravel located immediately south of the East Arm of

Steep Rock Lake (Shklanka, 1972; Taylor, 1976, Stone et al., 2002). The Eagle-Finlayson moraine is an elongate, rounded hill consisting of sand and gravel with scattered boulders. The moraine crosses at the southern end of Finlayson Lake. A portion of this moraine was removed during the diversion of the Seine River (Taylor, 1976). Highway 622 runs along the top of the

Eagle-Finlayson moraine (Stone et al., 1992).

Varved clays overlie the glacial till in the Atikokan and Seine River systems. These clays received special attention on the Steep Rock Iron Mines site because they were exposed after 17 Steep Rock Lake was drained and removed during dredging. The lake bed sediments were found to consists of a few feet of glacial till overlain by varved clay over 100 feet thick, followed by a thin layer of sand, and a black gelatinous ooze (Stone et al., 1992). These glacial features have been attributed to three phases of ice retreat of the Patricia ice mass during the late Wisconsin glaciation (Shklanka, 1972). First the ice sheet retreated to the Steep Rock mortaine, then advanced again before retreating to the Eagle-Finlayson moraine. Glacial Lake Agassiz bordered the ice sheet to the south and west of the two terminal moraines during its retreat resulting in the varved silts and clays (Shklanka, 1972; Stone et al., 1992). Recent peat deposit overlay the Pleistocene deposits in low-lying areas and lake basins.

The mineralogy of lower Magniferous Paint Member consists of quartz, chert, goethite, hematite, pyrolusite illite, kaolinite, crytomelane, manganite, gibbsite, muscovite, apatite and carbon (Stone et al., 1992). In terms of geochemistry, manganese, alumina and iron abundances increase towards the base (Stone et al., 1992).

The middle Goethite Member is considered a variation of the underlying Magniferous

Paint Member, and shows marked increases in the iron/manganese ratio and is composed dominantly of goethite, hematite, kaolinite and quartz (Stone et al., 1992).

The upper Pyrite Member consists of pyrite grains and aggregates, up to several centimeters in diameter, that are interbedded with cherty and aluminous sediments with small amounts of goethite, hematite and carbonaceous material (Stone et al., 1992). The Pyrite member is composed dominantly of pyrite with goethite, hematite, chert, quartz, calcite, limonite and with minor kaolinite and elemental carbon (Shklanka, 1972). The upper Pyrite Member, and its generated mine waste, is the acid generating unit at Steep Rock (Conly and MacDonald, 2004);

MacDonald, 2005); Cockerton, 2007; and, Conly et al., 2008ab).

The acid neutralizing unit is the Mosher Carbonate Formations that is composed of calcite, ankerite, dolomite and minor amounts of quartz, pyrite and kerogen (Stone et al., 1992). All 18 other units, the Marmion Complex, Witch Bay Formation, Wagita Formation and Dismal

Ashrock typically contain low abundances of pyrite and, although undetermined, the acid generating capacity is believed to be low.

2.3 Hydrologic Setting

Prior to 1943, most of the study site was beneath Steep Rock Lake, a widening of the

Seine River System (Fig. 1.2; Steep Rock Iron Mines, 1943; Taylor, 1976; Surrender 1986).

Steep Rock Lake was 14 miles long and took on the shape of a roughly drawn "M". From east to west the arms of Steep Rock Lake are referred to as Southeast Arm, East Arm, Middle Arm, and

West Arm (Fig. 1.3). The headwaters of the Seine originate in a swampy region near Raith,

Ontario an unorganized settlement approximately 93 km northwest of Thunder Bay, Ontario on

Highway 17. From Raith the water flows through Lac Des Mille Lacs and then through a winding river into Lake Marmion. At the north end of the Southeast Arm, the outlet of Marmion

Lake plunged about 30 m into Steep Rock Lake. The Seine River then traveled south down the

East Arm, north up the Middle Arm, and then turned south, exiting at the southern end of the

West Arm. From there the Seine river continues through Perche Lake, Banning Lake, Chub

Lake, Calm Lake, and over Sturgeon Falls before it enters into Rainy Lake at Seine Bay, marking the end of the river system (MNR, 1986).

The first water control developments on the Seine River occurred in 1929 and included the construction of three power generating stations by the Ontario-Minnesota Pulp and Paper

Company Limited to power a paper mill in Fort Frances (MNR, 1986). The power generating stations are called Moose Lake (between Marmion Lake and Steep Rock Lake), Calm Lake, and

Sturgeon Falls. Lac Des Mille Lacs serves as a reservoir to even flows in the Seine River to ensure steady flow for the hydroelectric dams through the use of a forth dam. The Moose Lake hydroelectric dam was closed to accommodate the Seine River Diversion in 1943, the first water 19 diversion in Canadian mining history (Taylor, 1978). After failure of underground mining techniques in 1940, a plan was created to divert the Seine River and drain Steep Rock Lake to allow the use of open pit mining methods to mine the iron ore from beneath the Middle and East

Arms of Steep Rock Lake. The plan was to isolate Steep Rock Lake by diverting the flow from

Marmion Lake through Raft Lake, into Finlayson Lake, and then connect to the West Arm of

Steep Rock Lake. The major problem to be overcome during the diversion was the elevation differences between the lakes because Raft Lake and Finlayson Lake water levels were higher than the water elevations of Marmion Lake. At the time the water level in Raft Lake was about

10 m (35 ft) higher than Marmion Lake and the water level in Finlayson Lake close to 0.5 m (2 ft) higher than Raft Lake. The diversion occurred in stages beginning with the Esker Cut at the southern end of Finlayson Lake.

The first stage of the Seine River Diversion involved lowering the water level in

Finlayson Lake. A swampy valley sloped down from Finlayson Lake to Wagita Bay in the West

Arm of Steep Rock Lake. A channel was dug down the valley, trees were cleared, and a concrete dam was built at Wagita Bay to control the flow of water into the West Arm. The

Eagle-Finlayson moraine blocked water from flowing from Finlayson Lake toward the West

Arm. To avoid uncontrolled flooding a tunnel was dug in bedrock beneath the esker and up into the bottom of the lake. Once the lake level dropped -12 m a channel named the Esker Cut at the south end of Finlayson Lake was widened. This segment of the diversion was completed in July

1943. The next stage of the diversion plan was to lower the water level by ~18 m in Raft Lake using pumps so that two ~30 m wide channels could be dug to the east and west of Raft Lake into Marmion Lake and Finlayson respectively. The Raft Lake Cut was completed in December

1943 (Fig. 1.3). Raft Lake Dam was built to control the flow from Marmion Lake to Finlayson

Lake. Another dam was constructed across 'The Narrows' between the Middle and West Arm of

Steep Rock Lake. Following the completion of the Seine River Diversion work began to drain 20 the Middle and East Arms of Steep Rock Lake and then to dredge the overburden overlying the ore body (Taylor, 1976; MNR 1985).

The overburden consisting of a thick layer of clay with sand gravel and occasional

boulders had a tendency to liquefy. A series of suction dredges were used to pump the

overburden through a tunnel from the Middle Arm into the West Arm. The silty-clay overburden

deposited in the West Arm washed down the Seine River from Steep Rock Lake to Rainy Lake

in 1951 turning the clear waters a muddy grey colour. Complaints of pollution came and as a

result a second diversion, called the Western Diversion, was constructed to eliminate the

pollution problem (MNR, 1986; Fig. 1.3). The Western Diversion was small relative to the Seine

River diversion and served to isolate the West Arm of Steep Rock Lake from the Seine River

turning the West Arm into a retention basin for the dredged overburden. The Western Diversion

involved increasing the height of Wagita Bay dam and construction of Reed Lake dam and three

earth dams at the southern end of West Arm. A channel constructed above Wagita Bay dam

diverts water through a series of lakes west of the West Arm reconnecting the Seine River and

effectively isolating the West Arm of Steep Rock Lake (Taylor, 1976; MNR, 1986). The

Western Diversion was complete in 1952 and successfully eliminated the pollution problem in

the Seine River and Rainy Lake.

Caland Ore Limited also undertook its own water diversions, lake draining, and dredging.

To minimize the cost of continuous pumping a number of dams, channels and tunnels were

constructed to divert water around the East and South East Arms of Steep Rock Lake (Fig. 1.2).

Hardy Dam was constructed across Hancock Creek blocking its flow in the South East Arm

creating the Rawn Reservoir (MNR, 1986). Water was released from the Rawn Reservoir to

Margret Lake flows to the Atikokan River watershed through two tunnels. The flow from three

other streams obstructed by the construction of Highway 622 is diverted into the Rawn Reservoir

creating the Auxiliary Rawn Reservoir via a series of channels and tunnels. Water flowing from 21 the Southeast Arm into the East Arm is blocked by Fairweather dam where it is pumped up into the Marmion watershed against 47 m of head. The overburden dredged from East Arm was pumped into the southern end of Marmion Lake. A series of dams joining islands just south of

Raft Lake outlet were constructed turning the southern end of Marmion Lake into a sediment retention basin (MNR, 1986).

Over 259 km2 of the Seine River watershed were affected by the water control structures and retention basins put in place to develop the mines on the Steep Rock Iron Range, permanently changing the watershed. The Seine River Act of 1952 made the changes to the

West Arm of Steep Rock Lake irreversible in order to avoid a similar pollution problem to that which occurred in 1951. The conversion of the West Arm increased its water level by 7 m (24 ft) from its original level of 384 m and reduced its depth to about 3 m. Mining activities left large open excavations. The former Steep Rock Lake basin was originally 21 m to 91 m deep and is now up to 335 m below the original lakebed. Since mine closure in 1979 the four open pit mines have been flooding (Fig. 1.1). In 2004, Hogarth and South Roberts pit lakes merged together forming one large pit lake known as Hogarth. Caland and Hogarth pit lakes have been filling independently of each other with all runoff with each of their drainage basins' entering the pits while losses are attributed to infiltration, evaporation and evapotranspiration (MNR, 1986).

In 2011 the water level in Caland and Hogarth Pit Lakes was 318.9 m and 313.7 m, respectively.

The pit lakes lie in the Seine River watershed, which marks the lowest elevation in the region,

385 m. The only outlet from the pit lakes is through the West Arm's southern outlet because the land surrounding the pit lakes is higher (Figure 2.3).

The regional groundwater flow rate includes groundwater flow seeping through surficial soils and fissures in the surrounding rock. Drainage into Hogarth Pit originates from the West

Arm and Highland Lake areas. Drainage into Caland Pit is from the Floodwater Area and 22 Fairweather Dam and drainage into Fairweather Lake from the based of Hardy Dam, part of the

Auxiliary Rawn Reservoir system (Fig. 1.2; Capper, 1978).

West Arm Road Railway Fairweather Dam Dam HWY. 62 Hardy Dam

394 400 391 384 385 Rawn Seine River Reservoir Middle West Silty Clay Arm Southeast Arm Mosher\ East Arm Dredged x Arm Point Overburden Original Lake juyngi Deposits 319 Surface 314 ~ 329 Elevation 384 Approximate 2011 Pit Lake Water Elevations

2.4 Previous Research

Prior to mine closure Steep Rock Resources Ltd. completed an environmental plan

(Capper, 1978). The purpose of this plan was to minimize leaching, prevent harmful substances from entering natural watercourses and increase aesthetics of the property. The plan proposed methods for treatment of tailings basins, pyritic stockpiles, water drainage and water quality

(Capper, 1978). Tailings ponds and surrounding areas were treated with various amounts of limestone and fertilizer and then seeded with grasses and legumes. Spillways were built in tailings dams in case drainage culverts became plugged. A combined total of 232,000 tonnes of pyritic crude waste is located on the property (Capper, 1978). The majority of the acidic mine waters detected was expected to drain into Hogarth Pit and be neutralized. Some stockpiles were 23 covered with carbonate and low sulphur waste and other stockpiles in the open pits were submerged as the water levels in the pits increased (Capper, 1978). The environmental plan noted that major influences on water quality were the waste rock piles, pyritic crude ore, and dolomite. Theoretical calculations and experiments led to the conclusion that there was enough carbonate in the wall-rock of the pits to neutralize all the acid that could potentially be generated by the pyrite on the property and thus no treatment would be required (Steep Rock Resources

Ltd., 1978). The study also included a rebound model for the water level in the pit lakes.

In 1985, Steep Rock Iron Mines approached the Ministry of Natural Resources (MNR) 9 9 • for a surrender of mining claims covering 52 km (20 miles ) including all of the former Steep

Rock Lake lakebed (MNR, 1986). The main concerns of the MNR included: the changes in water flow and lake elevations, mine waste deposits, structures that could not be removed and two sites contaminated with PCBs. Prior to acceptance of the surrender of mining claims, a two year long study was conducted and focused on the condition of water control structures and the future cost to maintain them. The study concluded that the West Arm water level would remain at or near its current level because the changes made to the West Arm are irreversible under the

Seine River Diversion Act of 1952. Thus future management of water levels on the property only includes the Middle, East, and South East Arms. The three main approaches that exist for future management are: 1) protect all developments on lakebed from flooding by keeping the East Arm water level below an elevation of 357 m and the Middle Arm water level to rise to 384 m; 2) let the water level rise to 385 m and gravity flow occur through the West Arm and relocate all developments as the water reaches them; or, 3) select an appropriate water level the Middle and

East Arms between the range of 357 m to 388 m based on least cost analysis (MNR, 1986). Two alterations to the current water management system are being considered but only on a conceptual level (R. Purdon, per. comm., September 19, 2011). The first change is to add a culvert or construct an overflow saddle weir at Fairweather dam in order to stabilize water levels 24 and to eliminate the need for pumping water from Faireweather Lake into Marmion Lake. The second change is to lower the level of the emergency spillway of Hardy dam in order to relieve pressure on the structure during high water levels. Both of these alterations would result in increased volumes of water flowing into Caland pit lake. The surrender report study also included a rebound model for the water level in the pit lakes that has proven to be accurate and

will be referred to as the Regional Engineering model in the remainder of this paper. The MNR

accepted the surrender of mining claims with the exception of two PCB contaminated sites.

Since the surrender, the MNR have had assessments and maintenance works on the various dams

associated with the water control structures of Steep Rock Iron Mines.

The water contamination in Hogarth and Caland pit lakes was not a known issue until 1998

when a study was conducted to investigate the impact of a fish farm on pit lake limnology

(McNaughton, 2001). Since Caland and Hogarth pit lakes are in close proximity, mined the

same ore bodies, and because Caland hosted a fish farm and Hogarth did not, the pit lakes

provided an opportunity to look influence of a fish farm on pit lake limnology. In the study,

McNaughton (2001) had intended for Hogarth pit lake to be a control lake because no fish farm

was present there. However, the study found that Hogarth was acutely toxic while Caland was

not. Moreover, the stratification of the two pit lakes was different, Hogarth was a holomictic

lake and Caland was a meromictic lake (McNaughton, 2001). The difference in chemistry and

stratification was attributed to the greater fresh water input into Caland and the higher pyrite

content in the Hogarth pit. Note that the fish farm in Caland pit lake was not part of the closure

plan and ceased operation in 2010. The anoxic nature of the lower part of the Caland water

column has generally been attributed, although not fully substantiated (Conly et al., 2008), to fish

farm activities. Owing to the effect the fish farm had on Caland water quality, resuming such

activity is consider by many, including the author, to be highly unlikely. A number of other

biology and geology students at Lakehead University have completed research projects 25 investigating toxicity, fill rates, flooding, and remediation methods at the former Steep Rock Iron

Mines site as well as a water quality monitoring program.

Aside from McNaughton (2001) other Lakehead University biology research projects include Vancook (2002), Gould (2008), and Godwin (2010). Vancook (2002) and Lee et al.

(2008) conducted a study to predict the future water chemistry of the pits, to model the pit filling rates, and conducted preliminary work on the use of wetlands for the remediation of contaminated water. The accuracy of the pit filling model had recently been questioned, and will be reevaluated in this study. Gould (2008) identified and evaluated the toxicant in the pit lakes.

The toxicant was identified to be elevated sulphate concentrations and it was found that the water in Hogarth pit lake has changed from acutely toxic to chronically toxic. Godwin (2010) and

Godwin et al. (2010) looked at the productivity of the contaminated waters in Hogarth and did a toxicity assessment. The study examined the effects of different water mixing scenarios between

Hogarth and Caland pit lakes on toxicity in an effort to predict future water chemistry changes.

Lakehead University geology, water resource science, and environmental earth science research projects include: MacDonald and Conly (2004), MacDonald (2005), Cockerton (2007),

Perusse (2009), Shankie (2011), Timmis (2011), Greiner (in progress) and this study. Conly and

MacDonald (2004), MacDonald (2005) and Conly et al. (2008a) conducted a stable isotope study and determined that the source of the elevated sulphate levels in the pits was the pyritic material found in the ore body and submerged waste. Column leaching experiments confirmed that pyritic waste rock was responsible for acid generation and sulphate production (Cockerton, 2007; Conly et al., 2008b). The column leaching experiments confirmed that the carbonate present on the property is capable of neutralizing acid production (Cockerton, 2007). A study by Perusse

(2008) was done on groundwater quality downstream from iron oxide and iron sulphide waste tailings ponds and waste dumps in order to investigate if there were differences in groundwater chemistry. The study found high sulphate groundwater down gradient of the sulphide waste 26 tailings ponds and waste rock dumps (Perusse, 2008). A study completed by Conly et al., (2010) and Shankie (2011) assessed the potential use of permeable reactive barriers for the remediation of high sulphate concentrations in Hogarth pit lake. The tailings and waste rock materials on the

Steep Rock site is under study by Timmis (2011) and Greiner (in progress). Timmis (2011) looked at the contamination of small catchment basins and the contamination from surrounding waste rock piles. Greiner (in progress) is conducting kinetic humidity cell tests.

2.4.1 Previous Rebound Models

Four rebound models for the Caland and Hogarth have previously been created, including: Steep

Rock Resources for their Environmental Plan (Capper, 1978); the Regional Engineering model by the MNR for the Surrender of Mining Claims Report (1986); Vancook (2002); and Jackson

(2007). The Steep Rock Resource Environmental Plan model predicts a rebound rate about 10 years faster than the MNR Regional Engineering Model (MNR, 1986). Based on extrapolation of rebound graphs given in the Surrender Report (1986), the water level in the East Arm will reach

385 masl in 2057 and will reach 394 masl in elevation in 2068 (Table 2.1). The water elevation of the West Arm (391 masl) is used in the Vancook (2002) and Jackson (2007) models as the final water elevation reached in their models. This is below the elevation of the expexted outlet to the West Arm but is above the elevation where Caland and Hogarth are expected to join.

According to Vancook (2002) Caland and Hogarth will reach an elevation of 390 masl in 2030

(Table 2.1). However, the accuracy of Vancook's (2002) model is questionable because it predicts a significantly quicker rebound rate than the Regional Engineering model (Figs. 2.4 and

2.5). The model made by Jackson (2007) predicts the pit lakes will reach an elevation of 390 masl in 2082 (Table 2.1). The Regional Engineering model has proven to be reasonably accurate with respect to measured water elevations for both pit lakes and is generally within 1 to 2 m of measured water elevations between 1979 and 2011 (Figs. 2.4 and 2.5). Since the predictions of 27 the Regional have proven most accurate it will be the only model used for comparison with study's rebound model predictions. Although the Regional Engineering model is reasonably accurate, documentation describing the methods used to construct the model is poor.

Furthermore, this study's models will contain more measured meteorological data to better constraining parameters such as precipitation volumes.

Table 2.1: Summary of previous rebound model predictions. Pits Join Pits Outflow Model Years from Years from Predicted Year Predicted Year closure closure Previous Works Capper (1978)* 2044 65 2049 70 Regional Model (1986)* 2057 78 2069 90 Vancook (2002) 2027 49 2030 51 Jackson (2007) 2059 80 2059 80 * Values extrapolated from graph provided in reports.

350 -,

330 -

310 -

290 -

270 -

250 -

• Measured Levels 230 -

—Regional Engineering Model (1986)

— Vancook (2002) 190 -

170 - Jackson (2007)

150 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 Years since 1979

Figure 2.4: Comparison of previous predictions made for rebound Caland pit lake to measured water elevations. • Measured Levels

Reginai Engineering Model (1986)

Vancook (2002)

Jackson (2007)

Years since 1979

Figure 2.5: Comparison of previous predictions made for rebound in Hogarth pit lake to measured water elevations. 29

Chapter 3: Rebound and Water Balance Models

3.1 General Introduction and Scope of Work

When undertaking a hydrologic study it is important to understand the principle of conservation of mass or 'mass continuity'. This is considered by some to be the core paradigm in hydrology, as a failure to consider mass continuity can lead to major calamities (Surrano, 1997;

Younger et al, 2002). A basic application of mass continuity in hydrology is the water balance that can simply be expressed as:

"water entering" - "water exiting" = "change in stored volume" (Eqn. 3.1)

Water level changes are easily related to the changes in storage: the volume of the void taken up by water as it rises to a new level equals the amount of water added to the system (Younger et al., 2002). Therefore, by modeling the relationships between stage, volume and surface area of an open pit mine void and calculating a water balance, it is possible to predict the rebound rate and future water levels. Before predictions can be made with any model the project objectives and a conceptual model of the system in question must be clearly defined. Construction of a conceptual model usually includes definition of limits, assumptions and parameters and is followed by calibration (Bear, 1979; Younger et al., 2002). It is important to understand the limitations and assumptions in the model as they introduce uncertainty (Bear, 1979).

The aim of this chapter is to develop a rebound model for Caland and Hogarth pit lakes and compare results to measured water elevations and to previous predictions. Three different approaches are used to predict rebound in this study. The first two models use a void filling 30 approach, where void volumes with elevation are represented by a "hypsometric curve", which is a cumulative frequency curve of mine void volume against height. These models assume that the water level in the pit lakes will follow the shape of the hypsometric curve. The water balance of each pit lake is computed following the equation from Shevenell (2000a) for the Gretchell pit lakes in Nevada. The difference between hypsometric models is the calibration (see sections

3.6.1 & 3.6.2). The first calibration method is based on adjusting the rate of groundwater inflow until predicted water levels match measured water levels during the calibration period. The second calibration method determines the groundwater term by difference between years with measured water elevations. The final modeling method consists of fitting an exponential curve to measured water elevations and forecasting future water levels.

This study's models will provide annual water level predictions up to an elevation of 394 m, the elevation of the outlet to the West Arm, which is higher than the final water elevations assumed in previous models. In addition a sensitivity analysis is completed to investigate the individual influence of each parameter on the model results.

3.2 Conceptual Model

Caland and Hogarth pit lakes can be conceptualized as two misshapen bowls open to the atmosphere. The pits receive water from precipitation landing on the pit lake surface, runoff from pit walls and from lateral groundwater flow. The pit lakes lose water via evaporation at the pit lake surface and eventually from outlets. The conceptual model for this study assumes that

Caland and Hogarth will be allowed to flood unabated and as the pit lakes flood they will join forming one lake large pit lake. After the pit lakes join, they will continue to flood until they reach the elevation of an outlet into the West Arm.

The land area that contributes runoff to the pit lakes is a key control in the calculation of the water inputs. As rebound progresses and with alteration to water control structures the 31 watershed area contributing runoff to the pit lakes changes. These changes occur at key elevations during the rebound process. Caland and Hogarth pit lakes are located in the East and

Middle Arms, respectively (Figs. 1.2 and 1.3). Fairweather Lake comprises the Southeast Arm and is separated from the East Arm by Fairweather Dam. The East and Southeast Arms were originally one large catchment with an area of approximately 64.7 km . The Auxiliary Rawn

Reservoir System was created to divert runoff from approximatelyt 40.1 km 2 of the catchment out of the Seine River watershed and into the Atikokan River system (Fig. 1.2). Alteration of the

Auxiliary Rawn Reservoir system can change the watershed area draining into the Southeast

Arm and subsequently the East Arm. This study does not take into account any changes to the

Auxiliary Rawn Reservoir System. The total catchment areas that contributing water to the

Middle, East and Southeast Arms, are -7.4 km 9 , -16.8 km9 and -7.8 km9 , respectively (MNR,

1986).

Currently, a pumping station at the base of Fairweather Dam controls the water level in

Faii-weather Lake; however, it is assumed that pumping will cease in 2014 and that an overflow

saddle weir will be constructed to allow water to flow from the Southeast Arm into East Arm (R.

Purdon, per. comm., Sept. 19, 2011). The water level of Fairweather Lake after the dam breach is

assumed to remain at its current level (375 masl) until the water level in Caland reaches the same

elevation. In the water balance calculations, the Southeast Arm catchment area is added to the

East Arm catchment area for the determination of the Caland watershed area contributing runoff

starting in 2014. The model assumes that Caland and Hogarth pit lakes will join before water

from the pits outflow into the West Arm. Contours based on 1982 aerial photographs were

visually examined using ArcGIS 9 to determine the elevation at which Caland and Hogarth join.

It is determined that water from Caland will flow into Hogarth when the water level in Caland

reaches an elevation of 385 masl. In the water balance calculations, once the water level in Caland reaches 385 masl, the East and Southeast catchment areas are added to the Middle Arm catchment area in the calculation of runoff for Hogarth. At this point in the water balance calculations and water level predictions terminate for the individual pit lakes and the all the lakes are considered as one in the remainder of the water balance calculations for Hogarth pit lake's rebound models. Because both pits are currently flooding independently of each other and the water level in Caland is rising at a slightly faster rate, Caland will flow into Hogarth following the original flow of the former Steep Rock Lake (Figs. 1.2 and 1.3). After the two pit lakes join, they are predicted to outflow into the West Arm at the Narrows Dam (Fig. 1.2). The crest of the

Narrows Dam has an elevation of 396 to 397 masl but the model assumes a water control channel 2 m lower will be constructed (R. Purdon, per. comm. Jan. 12, 2011). The termination of the rebound model is when the predicted water level in for the new Steep Rock Pit Lake reaches

394 masl.

3.3 Stage - Volume Relationships

The stage-volume relationships, which define the volume of the pits to be flooded, are key parameters in the rebound model. The volumes of Hogarth, Caland and Fairweather Lake are calculated using contour intervals and the surface area computed for each contour interval up to an elevation of 400 masl. For the pit elevations below 200 masl, measurements are taken directly from the pit limits based on 30 m contour interval provided in the Steep Rock Environmental

Plan (Capper, 1978). Data for elevations from 200 to 400 masl are taken from 10 m contours based on 1982 aerial photography. Using ArcGIS 9, contours were traced to create polygons then the surface area of each polygon was measured. Islands were traced and their areas subtracted from the appropriate contour surface areas. The surface areas for Fairweather Lake were added to those of Caland at the appropriate elevations and the areas of all three lakes are summed at an elevation of 390 masl. The volumes of each pit lake are summed in ascending order with 33 elevation to determine the cumulative volume of the lakes with elevation. The volume between each contour interval is calculated using the equation:

Volume (m3) = (h/3) • (al + a2 + V(al • a2)) (Eqn. 3.2)

Where: h = contour interval (m) aj = area of lower contour (m2) a2 = area of upper contour (m2)

The elevation, surface area and accumulated volume data are used to create hypsometric curves and elevation - surface area curves for Caland and Hogarth pit lakes. The pit lake volume calculations are provided in Appendix I. Exponential trendlines are fitted to scatter plots of cumulative volume and elevation data to create hypsometric curves, and to surface area and elevation data (Figs. 3.1 and 3.2). The equations for these relationships are used in the water balance calculations to determine the water surface elevation and pit surface area for each timestep (Figs. 3.1, 3.2, 3.3 and 3.4). The hypsometric curves are used in the water balance calculations to determine the initial volume of water in the pits given known water elevations and water elevations given the accumulated volume calculated for that year. The determined elevation is then used in the elevation - surface area equation to determine the surface area of the pit for that year. 34

9.0E-08

5.0E-08

0 50 100 150 200 250 J00 350 450 Elevation (m)

Figure 3.1: The hypsometric curve for Caland pit. The hypsometric curve is shown by the black line and the points are the determined accumulated volume with elevation.

5.0E08

| 2.0E-08 1.5E-08

1.0E-08

O.OEOO 100 150 200 ISO 300 350 450

Elevalion (m)

Figure 3.2: The hypsometric curve for Hogarth pit. The hypsometric is shown by the black line and the points are the determined accumulated volume with elevation. 35

1.6E-0?

I.2E-0?

» OB 0?

< 8.0E 06 •

6.0E-G6 -

4.0E-O6 -

O.OEOO 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 Elevation (m)

3.3: The elevation - surface area curve for Caland pit. The elevation-surface area curve is shown by the black line and the points correspond to the measured surface area at each contour interval of the pit.

y = 3412e R2 - 0.9546 6.0E-' 06

2.0E+06

100 150 200 300 350 400 450

Figure 3.4: The elevation - surface area curve for Hogarth pit. The elevation-surface area curve is shown by the black line and the points correspond to the measured surface area at each contour interval of the pit. 36

3.4 Water Balance

The water balance of Caland and Hogarth pit lakes was determined following the example of Shevenell (2000a). The Caland and Hogarth water balance are calculated separately until the pits join when the water level reaches 385 m in elevation, as described in the conceptual model (section 3.2). The pit lake water balances are represented by the equation:

P + R - E + (GWj - GW0) = AS (Eqn. 3.3)

Where: P = precipitation (m /year) R = runoff (m3/year) E = evaporation (m3/year) 3 (GWj - GW0) = net groundwater flux (m /year) AS = change in storage (m3/year)

The change in storage (AS) was calculated annually, from 1980 until the pit lake water level reaches 394 masl. The change in storage was summed to the accumulated volume in the previous year in order to determine that years accumulated volume. The initial pit volume was determined using the known elevation in 1979 and 1986 in Hogarth and Caland, respectively, and the stage- volume relationships.

Precipitation (P) is the amount of precipitation that lands directly on the pit lake surface each year and was calculated using the equation (Surrano, 1997):

P = p/1000* SAP (Eqn. 3.4) Where: p = annual precipitation rate (mm/year) SAp = area of the pit lake surface (m2)

The annual precipitation rate (p) was calculated from historical weather records from the

National Climate Data and Information Archive (see section 3.5.1). The surface area of the pit 37 lake (SAp) varies through time and was determined from the accumulated volume from the previous timestep and the stage-volume relationships described in section 3.3.

Runoff (R) is the amount of precipitation landing within the watershed that drains into the pits and is not lost to evaporation, infiltration or soil absorption. R was calculated using the equation based on the equation used in the Regional Engineering model (MNR, 1986):

R = p/1000 * SAW * RF (Eqn. 3.5) Where: SAw = watershed surface area RF = retention factor

The watershed surface area (SAw) varies through time and was calculated by taking the total watershed areas contributing water to each pit and subtracting surface area of the pit lakes calculated in the previous timestep. The total watershed areas draining into Caland and Hogarth

Pit Lakes changes as described in the conceptual model.

The retention factor (RF) is the percentage of precipitation landing within the watershed area that enters the pit lakes as runoff. A 40% retention factor was used, which is the same as in previous water balance calculations (MNR, 1986). The methods used to determine the retention factor was not described in the Surrender Report (MNR, 1986).

Evaporation (E) is the amount of water evaporating from the pit lake surfaces each year and was calculated accordingly:

E = e/1000 * SAp (Eqn. 3.6) Where: e = annual evaporation rate (mm/year) SAp = pit lake surface area

The annual evaporation rate (e) was determined using historical weather data from National

Climate Data and Information Archive, and is estimated following the method described in section 3.5.2. In order to simplify the model, groundwater inflow (GWj) and groundwater outflow,

(GW0) were considered as a combined term, the net groundwater flux (GWi - GW0) following the example of Shevenell (2000a). The net groundwater flux does not consider where or how the water is entering or exiting the pit lakes. Therefore, the model does not require constraints on hydraulic properties or gradients for which there is limited information for the study area. The net groundwater flux term is used to calibrate the model as described in section 3.6.2.

3.5 Determination of Meteorological Parameters

The required meteorological parameters for the water balance calculations are precipitation and evaporation. Meteorological data was acquired from the National Climate Data and

Information Archive (www.climate.weatheroffice.gc.ca). Measured values without missing or estimated data are used in water balance calculations whenever possible. The proceeding sections (3.5.1 and 3.5.2) described how annual precipitation and evaporation rates were determined for use in the water balance calculations.

3.5.1 Precipitation

Precipitation data was acquired from National Climate Data and Information Archive for

weather stations within 25 km of Atikokan. Four weather stations met the search criteria, but

only two had monthly precipitation data during the period of between 1979 and 2009. For each

year the monthly precipitation totals were summed to determine the total annual precipitation.

Measured precipitation data (without missing or estimated values) exists for 1979 to 1987 and

1995 to 2005 from Atikokan and Atikokan-Marmion weather stations, respectively.

For the period from 1988 to 1994, the missing precipitation data is estimated. Two

estimation methods for precipitation were considered: the weighted average method and the

normal inverse ratio method (Surrano, 1997). The weighted average method, developed by the 39

U.S. Weather Service, requires data from four index stations located as close as possible to the station with missing data. One of the index stations must be located in one of the four quadrants delimited by a north-south and east-west axis drawn through the station in question. This method cannot be used in mountainous regions (Surrano, 1997). In the normal inverse ratio method, the missing precipitation value is estimated based on at least three index stations that are as evenly spaced from the station with missing data as possible. Annual precipitation values are typically used in the calculation but monthly values can be used as well.

Potential index weather stations within 200 km of Atikokan and with monthly precipitation data for the period from 1979 to 2006 are listed in Table 3.1 and their locations are shown Figure

3.5. After examining the weather station locations it was concluded that there was insufficient data for the weighted average method because the requirement of having a weather station in each of the four quadrants was not met. A cluster of relatively equally spaced weather stations exists to the west of Atikokan. Consequently, the normal inverse ratio method is well suited to the available data because the weather stations are evenly spaced around Atikokan, and located to the west eliminating the influence of Lake Superior. Precipitation across the region is influenced to varying degrees by Lake Superior. Winds off Lake Superior can increase atmospheric moisture, an affect that decreases with distance (Heinselmen, 1996). This affect on precipitation can be seen by looking at the precipitation rates and the distance of index weather stations from Atikokan, the further the index weather station is to the west the lower its annual precipitation rate (Table 3.1). To further evaluate whether the precipitation values from the index stations are representative of Atikokan, the average monthly distribution values from 1971 to

2000 Canadian Climate Normals were plotted for comparison (Fig. 3.6). 40

Table 3.1: List of weather stations used in the estimation of missing precipitation values from the National Climate Data and Information Archive. Approx. Distance Annual Station Climate Elevation from Latitude °N Longitude °W Precipitation Identifier ID (m) Atikokan (mm/year) (km) Atikokan 6020384 - 48°48.000' 91°34.800' 442 - Marmion

Atikokan 6020379 - 48°45.000' 91°37.200' 395 739.7 Fort Francis A 6022476 133 48°39.000' 93°25.800' 342 720.7 Fort Francis 6022475 134 48°37.200' 93°25.200' 343 709.5 Dryden A 6032117 144 48°46.800' 92°49.800' 372 701.5 Dryden 6032119 145 48°49.800' 92°45.000' 413 705.5 Mine Centre 6025203 74 48°46.200' 92°37.200' 343 728.6 Rawson Lake 6036904 183 48°39.000' 93°43.200' 358 688.4 Stratton Romyn 6028182 188 48°42.000' 94°10.200' 366 711.1

ationaOfjalls

Figure 3.5: Google image of weather station locations used in this study and that of Heineselmen (1996). Weather stations marked by yellow flags are stations with 25 km of Atikokan; blue flags are stations within 200 km to West of Atikokan; green are stations used by Heineselmen (1996); and, the orange flag is the Thunder Bay weather station. 41

140.0 -j

120.0

Januaty February March April May June July August September Oaobcr November December Month

Atikokan Dryden Dryden A — -— Fort Franccs Fon Frances A Mine Centre —— Rawson Lake — Stratum Romyn

Figure 3.6: Comparison of average monthly precipitation distributions of the index stations to the Atikokan weather station used in the normal inverse ratio method of estimating precipitation.

All weather stations except those in Dryden have a similar monthly precipitation distribution; however, Dryden stations are used in the estimation of precipitation in order to meet the minimum required number of index stations for each year precipitation is estimated. The monthly precipitation rates in Dryden are close to those in Atikokan but Dryden has a higher maximum monthly precipitation rate (117.5 mm/month) and it occurs in July instead of June like

Atikokan (103.3 mm/month; Fig. 3.6).

Precipitation data from the index weather stations was processed in the same manner as the

Atikokan data described above to determine annual precipitation totals for each station. The normal inverse ratio is expressed accordingly (Surrano, 1997):

(Eqn. 3.7) 42

Where: Pi = missing measured precipitation value at station of interest = P2 ... Pn measured precipitation value at index stations for the concurrent period Pi (bar) = mean annual precipitation value at station of interest P2 • • • Pn (bar) = mean annual precipitation value at index station N = total number of weather stations (Surrano, 1997).

The total number of weather stations varies depending on the number of index stations with measured data for that particular year. The mean annual precipitation values are equal to the total precipitation from the 1971 - 2000 Canadian Climate Normals for each station. The calculation of the missing precipitation data using the normal inverse ratio method is given in

Appendix II.

Predicted precipitation values were compared to measured values (Fig. 3.7). The estimated precipitation values followed a similar pattern to measured values. The percent difference between measured and estimated values is less than or equal to 13% except in 2003 where there is a 25% difference. The large variation in 2003 is likely because the index weather stations on average had annual precipitation values significantly less than those measured in Atikokan. All variations in the estimated precipitation values likely result from the index stations having on average higher or lower measured annual precipitation relative to Atikokan. The variance in measured precipitation may be due to the fact that the Atikokan weather stations are located at a higher elevation than the index stations (Table 3.1). The error in precipitation measurements from a rain gauge that is properly sited, maintained and calibrated is +/- 10% and the difference between estimated precipitations rates and measured rates in this study is typically less than or equal to 13%, the error in the estimated precipitation values is considered acceptable for use in the water balance model (Levin and Cotton, 2009). From the year 2003 and to model termination, an annual precipitation value of 739.6 mm/year (based on the 1971-2000 Canadian

Climate Normals) is used in the water balance calculations. The year 2003 is the last year with 43 measured precipitation data. The use of predicted precipitation values may increase the accuracy of the models compared to a constant rate because the predicted values would show precipitation variability over time.

400.0 1978 1983 1993 2003 Year

- - - • Estimated precipitation values Measured precipitation rates

Figure 3.7 Comparison of estimate annual precipitation to measured annual precipitation from 1978 to 2003 at the Atikokan weather station.

3.5.2 Evaporation

One weather station, Atikokan, has pan evaporation measurements for 1966 to 1988.

Evaporation was measured each year for a period of six months, May to October. Annual totals are based on cumulative daily values. Measured evaporation data was used in the water balance calculation from 1979 to 1988. The average evaporation value for that period is 511.4 mm/year, which is higher than that for the period 1966 to 1988 (461.3 mm/year). An attempt was made to predict evaporation rates for the remaining years during the calibration period. Two methods, the 44

Penmen Equation and the Thornwaite Equation, were used (Penman, 1948; Thornwaite, 1948;

Surrano, 1997; Cornwell and Harvey 2007). The Penman method estimates evaporation using the following equations (Eqns. 3.8 -310):

PET = (aEn + Ea)/(a-1) (Eqn. 3.8)

Where: PET = potential evapotranspiration (mm/day) a = function of air temperature (Ponce, 1989) En = net radiation in evaporation units (mm/day) Ea = mass-transfer in evaporation rate units (mm/day)

En = (CiQn)/pL (Eqn. 3.9)

Where: Ci = unit conversion constant (1000 mm/m) Qn = net radiation (cal/m •day) p = density of water (1000 kg/m3) L = latent hear of evaporation (cal/kg)

Ea = ((100-r)/100))(c2+c3W)es (Eqn. 3.10) Where: r = relative humidity (%) C2 = 0.1733 mm/daymmHg C3 = 0.0512 mm•hour/day• km• mm11g W = wind speed (km/hour) Es = saturated vapour at surface air temperature (mmHg)

The Thornwaite method estimates evaporation (Ep) using the equations (Eqn. 3.11 - 3.13):

M 0.444h((10TA)/I) , 0>Ta>26.5°C

2 Ep =^-13.862 + 1.0747Ta - 0.01442Ta , Ta> 26.5°C (Eqn. 3.11)

f 0, Ta < 0°C

Where: Ta = air temperature h = hours of sunlight per day

I = sum of (Tm/5)1 514 (Eqn. 3.12) 45

Where: I>0 TM - average monthly temperature

m = (6.75*10~7)!3 - (7.7M0~5)I2 + (1.79-10 2)! + 0.492 (Eqn. 3.13)

The Penman method generally overestimates evaporation rates whereas the Thornwaite method tends to underestimate rates (Serrano, 1997). Evaporation estimates were calculated as daily average values using the Penman and Thornwaite equations. The solar radiation data was meausured at a weather station in Moosonee, Ontario, which is the nearest weather station to

Atikokan that measures global solar radiation. The Penman estimates are close to measured values, overestimating them in the spring and underestimating them in the fall. The Thornwaite equation significantly underestimates the evaporation rates, even when corrected for latitude using correction constants given in Surrano (1997; Fig. 3.8). The calculation of missing evaporation data using the Penman and Thorwaite equations is provided in Appendix III.

Although, the Penman evaporation estimates are close to average monthly values, the annual total evaporation predicted 548 mm/year, is higher than the average measured evaporation rates for the period from 1979 to 1988 (511.4 mm/year) and from 1966 to 1988 (461 mm/year). Because the estimated evaporation rates over- and underestimate measured values and could not be calculated for each year during the remainder of the calibration period because of data limitation, the average annual measured evaporation rate of 511.4 mm/year is used in the calculations from 1989 and on. Like precipitation, the use of estimated evaporations rates, if data is available, would likely increase the accuracy of the models compared to constant rates because the estimate evaporation rates would show annual variability. 46

May June July August September October Montb -Penman Thornthwaite —— Corrected Thornthwaite Average Actual

Figure 3.8: Graph showing measured and estimated monthly evaporation rates.

3.6 Rebound Models and Calibration

3.6.1 Models

Rebound in the Steep Rock pit lakes is predicted in two ways. First, a void filling approach is used where the stage-volume relationship are described in section 3.3. Two variations of each of the rebound prediction methods, Models 1A & B and Models 2A & B, are made based on different calibration methods described in section 3.6.2. Secondly, rebound is predicted by simply extrapolating an exponential curve fitted to measured water elevations. In this method an exponential trend line is based on measured water level taken between 1979 -

2009 for Caland and Hogarth and the curve was forecasted into the future until predicted water 47 levels reach 394 masl. Exponential curves were calculated for Caland and Hogarth in Model 3A and 3B, respectively, and these models are not calibrated.

3.6.2 Calibration

The groundwater water flux term is used to calibrate the rebound models 1 A, IB, 2A and

2B. In the first calibration method (Model 1), the average net groundwater flux term is found by adjusting the net groundwater flux term by trial and error each year so that predicted water levels match measured levels during the calibration period. For the second calibration method (Model

2), the net groundwater flux term is determined by difference for years with measured water levels, precipitation and evaporation data.

Model 1A and IB are constructed using the first calibration method. The difference between Model 1A and IB is the length of the calibration period. In model 1 A, the calibration periods for Caland and Hogarth are from 1986 to 2009 and 1979 to 2009, respectively. In model

IB, the calibration periods for Caland and Hogarth are from 1986 to 2003 and 1979 to 2003, respectively. The difference between Model 1A and Model IB is that Model 1A includes a period of time, from 2006 - 2009, where a constant precipitation rate is used instead of measured or predicted precipitation due to data limitations whereas Model IB calibration period only includes years with measured and estimate annual precipitation values. During the calibration period measured water levels were not available for 1979 - 1985, 1987, 1992, 1994, 1995, 1997,

1998, 2005 and 2006 with the exception of a measured level in 1979 for Hogarth only. The annual net groundwater flux rate is only changed on or immediately after years with measured water levels and remains constant for years between measured water levels. Once predicted water levels matched measured water levels for the calibration period, the net groundwater influx values for the calibration period are averaged to determine the average annual net groundwater influx rate for each pit. The average annual net groundwater flux is then used in the water 48 balance calculations for each pit lake starting in 2010 to predict future water levels and to back cast water levels in Caland to the year 1979.

The second calibration method is used for Models 2A and 2B. In these models the net groundwater flux term is determined by difference using the equation from Shevenell (2000a):

(GWi-GW0) = (V2 - Vi) - P - R + E (Eqn. 3.14)

Where: Vi = volume of pit lake at time, tj V2 = volume of pit lake at time, t2

V2 and Vi are calculated using the stage-volume relationships and water balance calculations for years with known water elevations. Then net groundwater flux is computed by difference between the timesteps with measured elevations. The net groundwater influx was calculated for both pit lakes for 1988 to 1991, 1993, 1996 and 1999 to 2003, with one additional timestep, 1986 for Hogarth only. The average annual net groundwater flux value is computed by averaging the net groundwater flux values determined by difference in the calibration period. The difference between Model 2A and 2B is that the computed average annual net groundwater flux values for

Model 2B only includes net groundwater flux values calculated where back-to-back annual measured water levels exist, whereas Model 2A includes net groundwater influx values averaged between years without back-back measured water elevations. After the calibration period, the groundwater influx value is held constant and equals the average net groundwater flux calculated by calibration method.

3.7 Sensitivity Analysis

The model that best matches measured water elevations between 1979 and 2011 and the predictions of any previous rebound model that has proven accurate, will undergo a sensitivity 49 analysis designed to investigate how sensitive model results are to variations in individual parameter values. The selected rebound model was run a number of times with an individual parameter varied by a certain percentage each time, in order to see the parameters influence on rebound rate predictions. The water balance parameters that are varied are precipitation, runoff, evaporation and the net groundwater influx. The model selected and the manner in which each parameter is varied is described in section 3.8.5 and subsections within.

3.8 Results

3.8.1 Summary of this study's predictions

Results of the rebound models are summarized in Table 3.2 and Figures 3.9 and 3.10.

The calculated average annual groundwater influx rates determined during the calibration period are given in Table 3.3. Complete water balance calculations and water level predictions for rebound Models 1A, IB, 2A, 2B, 3A and 3C are provided in Appendix IV.

Table 3.2: Rebound model predictions for when Caland and Hogarth join and outflow into the West Arm.

Pits Join Pits Outflow Model Years from Years from Predicted Year Predicted Year closure closure This Study 1A 2075 96 2093 114 IB 2077 98 2095 116 2A 2064 85 2078 99 2B 2070 91 2087 108 3A 2067 88 2080 101 3B 2123 144 2152 173

Table 3.3: The net groundwater influx values calculated during each of the models respective calibration period.

Calculated Annual Net Groundwater Influx (m3/year) Model Hogarth Caland 1A 322319 80300 IB 322295 620500 2A 1031614 2106246 2B 625289 1401100 50

* Measured Levels

Years since 1979

Figure 3.9: Graph showing the results of the rebound models for Caland and measured water levels from 1979 to 2011.

* Measured Levels

IS 20

Years since 1979

Figure 3.10: Graph showing the results of the rebound models for Hogarth and measured water levels from 1979 to 2011. 51

Predictions For When the Caland Pit Lake Surface Reaches 385 masl: Model 1A and IB predict that it will take between 96 and 98 years, respectively, from mine closure for Caland to reach the joining elevation of 385 masl. This is 5 and 7 years longer than Model 2B predictions and 11 to 13 years longer than Model 2A (Table 3.2). Model 3A estimates it will take 88 years from mine closure for the water level in Caland to reach 385 masl which is intermediate to

Models 2A and 2B.

Predictions for When the New Steep Rock Pit Lake Surface Reaches 385 and 394 masl:

All models (1 A, IB, 2A, 2B, 3A and 3B) predict it will take Hogarth water levels longer to rebound to an elevation of 385 masl than Caland. This is in agreement with the fact that water levels in Caland are currently rising quicker than Hogarth and with the original flow path through the former Steep Rock Lake.

Models 1A and IB predict it will take 114 to 116 years from mine closure, respectively, for the pit lake water elevation to reach 394 masl (Table 3.2). Models 2A and 2B predict it will take 99 and 108 years from mine closure, respectively. Model 3A predicts that water levels will reach an elevation of 394 masl in 101 years from mine closure. Model 3B predicts the longest rebound rate, with the water level reaching 394 masl in elevation in 173 years from mine closure.

The prediction by Model 3A is only 2 years longer than Model 2A and 7 years shorter than

Model 2B.

Models 3 A and 3B inherently assume that factors controlling the decline in the rate of rebound remains constant through time, which is not the case. The factors controlling the rebound rate change when Caland water surface reaches 385 masl in elevations and water begins to flow into Hogarth. Caland's water level will no longer rise until the water level in Hogarth reaches 385 masl in elevation and Hogarth will receive a constant source of water from outside 52 its watershed changing its water balance. These changes in the factors controlling the rebound rate are accounted for in Model 1 A, IB, 2A and 2B.

3.8.2 Comparison of This Study's Predictions to Measured Water Elevations

Caland Models: All models except 3A begin with the same initial water elevation of

231.3 masl in 1986 (Fig. 3.9). Models 1A and IB follow a similar trend between 1986 and 2003 as they are forced to match measured water levels during that period of time. In 2003, the calibration period for Model IB terminates, but continues to 2009 in Model 1 A. Model 1A water level predictions are within lm of measured water elevations for 2010 and 2011. Model IB water level predictions become progressively lower than measured water levels from 2007 to 2011.

Model 2A predictions are higher than all measured water levels except for the initial water level of 231.3 masl in 1986. Model 2B initially predicts higher water levels but begins to match measured water levels in 1999, after which its predictions are within 1 m of measured water elevations. Model 3 A water level predictions are all lower than measured water elevations, but the predicted levels for 2011 are within 1 m of the measured level. The lowest depth of Caland pit lakes' water level is back cast by Model 3A with an elevation of approximately 86 masl. The lowest water elevations in Models 1A and IB are 117 masl and 127 masl, respectively, and lower elevations than Models 2A and 2B at 132 masl and 152 masl, respectively.

Hogarth Models: All models except 3B begin with the same initial water elevation of

148.7 masl in 1979 (Fig. 3.10). Model 1A and IB follow a similar trend between 1986 and 2003 as they are forced to match measured water levels during that period of time. The calibration period for Model IB ends in 2003 and that for Model 1A continues until 2009. Models 1A and

IB both predict water levels within 1 m of measured elevations from the end of their respective calibration periods to 2011. In general the predictions by Model 2A are 5 m to 10m higher than measured water levels from 1979 to 2011. Model 2B predictions for water levels are higher by 53 up to 4 m from 1986 to 1991 and in 1993 the predicted water level is within 1 m of the measured elevation for that year. From 1996 to 2003, Model 2B water level predictions are lower than measured elevations by up to 4 m and from 2007 to 2011 predictions are within 1 m of measured levels. Model 3B has a lower initial water elevation in 1979 at 136 masl. Model 3B predictions for 1996, 1999 and 2000 are within 1 m of measured water elevations however; in general, predictions made by Model 3B overestimate measured water levels prior to 1996 and underestimate water levels after 2000 by about 4 m.

3.8.3 Comparison of This Study's and the Regional Engineering Model's Predictions

Caland Models: The results of all the rebound models for Caland pit lake are compared to the Regional Engineering model in Figure 3.11. The lowest water elevation predicted by the

Regional Engineering model (1986), 151 masl, is similar to that of Model 2B, 152 masl, except that the Regional Engineering model's the water elevation occurs in 1979 as opposed to 1982 for

Model 2B. The lowest water elevations, back cast in all other models, are below the estimate in

the Regional Engineering model. Model 2A water level predictions from 1986 to 2011 are higher

than those of the Regional Engineering model. Model IB matches the overall trend of the

Regional Engineering model relatively well but predicts a lower water level, 323.9 masl in 2015

compared to the Regional Engineering model's prediction of 326.4 masl. In general, Models 1A

and 2B predictions best match the overall trend of the Regional Engineering model from 1986 to

2015. Model 1A is forced to match all the measured water elevations except for 2010 and 2011.

Model 1A 2010 prediction, 317.3 masl, is closer to the measured elevation, 317.9 masl, than the

predicted water level by the Regional Engineering model, 315.1 masl. Model 2B predictions

from 1986 to 1994 are greater than those by the Regional Engineering model by 2 m or more and

from 1995 to 2015 the difference is less than 2 m. In 1999, 2000 and 2010, the predicted water 54 levels by Model 2B are closer to measured elevations than the Regional Engineering model predictions.

" - tl)86 - initial water level in Models 1 A, IB, 2A, 213.

336

——Regional Engineering Model * Measured Elevations

Years since 1979

Figure: 3.11: Comparison of measured water elevations to this study's rebound model predictions for Caland and to those of the Regional Engineering model.

Hogarth Models: The results of all the rebound models for Hogarth pit lake are compared to the Regional Engineering model in Figure 3.12. The Regional Engineering model predictions for Hogarth begin in 1980, a year after those in this study. This study's models all have a minimum water elevation below that predicted by the Regional Engineering model (1986).

Model 1A and IB are forced to match all the measured water elevations except for 2010 and

2011. The predicted 2010 water level of models 1A and IB 2010 (312.7 masl) is closer to the measured elevation (312.8 masl) than that predicted by the Regional Engineering model (310.9 masl). Model 2A predictions are higher than the Regional Engineering model predictions from

1980 to 2015 with the length of time predicted for the pit lakes to completely fill by Model 2 A 55 being approximately 9 years longer. Water levels estimates of Model 2B are within 6.5 m of the

Regional Engineering model estimated water levels. In all years except 2010, the water level predictions made by the Regional model are closer to the measured than Model 2B. In 2010, the water level prediction by Model 2B (311.5 masl) is closer to the measured elevation (312.8 masl) than the Regional Engineering model (310.9 masl).

330

310 •

290 -

210 -

1 250- =B •$ 230 •

id 210 • a £ 190 • 1A IB m - - 2A -2B \S0 ' -3A - Regiutiil lingtiHXTJHg Model (19-H6) Measured Klcvatiuits 130 • 10 15 20 25 30 35 40

Years since 1979

Figure: 3.12: Comparison of measured water elevations to this study's rebound model predictions for Hogarth and to those of the Regional Engineering model.

3.8.4 Sensitivity Analysis Results

Based on the comparative analysis (Section 3.8.2), Models 1A, 2B and 3A best match measured for Caland pit lake and Models 1A, IB and 2B best match measured and predicted water levels for Hogarth pit lake. Of these models, Models 1A and 2B predictions provide predictions close to measured water elevations for both Caland and Hogarth pit lakes. Since

Model 1A is forced to match measured water levels until 2009 only the 2010 and 2011 measures 56 levels can be compared with model predictions. The 2010 and 2011 water level predictions in

Models 1A and 2B are within 1 m of measured levels for both pit lakes. Variances in Model 2B water level predictions from the measured water levels are likely the result of the limited number of years with measured water levels, precipitation and evaporation rates during calibration. From

2011 to 2017 the difference between Model 1A and 2B predictions progressively decreases to 10 cm in 2016 and 2017. After 2017 Model 2B water level predictions become higher than those by

Model 1A. There is a 5 year difference between the predictied time until the pits join by Model

1A and 2B and a 6 year difference between the predicting total filling time (Table 3.2). Therefore the Model 1A and 2B predictions are reasonable close to each other. Since 2B matches the 2011 measured water elevations for Caland better than Model 1A and both models predict water elevations within 1 m for Hogarth, Model 2B was selected for the sensitivity analysis. Caland received more runoff resulting in Caland having greater control on the rebound rate than

Hogarth. Waters that outflow from Caland into Hogarth significantly increases the rate of water level rise in Hogarth. Thus, the accuracy of the Caland predictions took precedent over those for

Hogarth in the selection of the best-calibrated model for the pit lakes. Water balance and water level predictions each of the models run in the sensitivity analysis are provided in Appendix V.

Precipitation: A total of eight rebound models were run where the average annual

precipitation rate used in Model 2B (739.6 mm/year) was varied by a certain percentage (5-40%;

Fig. 3.13). The maximum (1010 mm/year) and minimum (578 mm/year) measured precipitation

rates for 1979 to 2006 are within the variance in precipitations rates for the sensitivity analysis.

A decrease in precipitation rate by 20% is approximately equal to the minimum measured

precipitation rate and a 40% increase in precipitation is approximately equal to the maximum

precipitation rate. A decrease in the precipitation rate creates a greater difference in rebound rate 57 than an increase (Fig. 3.13). A 5% variance in precipitation rate results in a 4-year difference in rebound rate and a 10% variance results in a 9-year difference in rebound rate.

Increasing Rate Decreasing Rate

Final Water Elevation

Model 2B

+40%

Runoff: A total of six models were run that vary the retention factor in the runoff volume calculation from that used in Model 2B and are shown in Figure 3.14. The initial retention factor

(40%) value is varied by 5%, 10% and 20%. A 5% variance in the retention factor resulted in a

7-year difference in rebound rate.

Evaporation: A total of ten models were run that each vary the average annual evaporation rate used in Model 2B and are shown on Figure 3.15. The initial evaporation rate

(511.4 mm/year) was varied by 5%, 10%, 20%, 30% and 40%. The range of evaporation rates used in the sensitivity analysis extends beyond the maximum (595.9 mm/year) and minimum 58

(317.6 mm/year) measured evaporation rates from 1966 to 1988. A 20% change in the evaporation rate is required before a significant change (>5 years) occurs in the rebound rate. A

40% change in the evaporation rate is required to change the rebound rate by more than 10 years.

Final Water Elevation

378 -

§• 3SS- sg

348

328 -

31S •10%

•20% 308 •

298 2094 2024 2044 2064 2084 2104 2124 Year

Net Groundwater Influx: A total of twelve rebound models were run that each vary the

-5 average groundwater influx value for Caland and Hogarth, 1,401,100 m /year and 625,289

"2 m /year, respectively, by 5 to 70% are shown on Figure 3.16. A 30% increase or decrease in the groundwater rate is required to change the rebound rate by 5 years, and a change of 70% results in a difference of 10 years. 59

Final Water Elevation

29S 2004 2014 2064 2094 Year

Elevation

$ U

328 -

2074 Year

3.9 Discussion

3.9.1 Study Results

A number of rebound models have been made for Caland and Hogarth pit lakes (Capper,

1978; MNR, 1986; Vancook, 2002; Jackson, 2007; this study). The methods and data used to predict rebound in Caland and Hogarth pit lakes vary. The Steep Rock Resources model used the ultimate pit limits at -30 m (100 ft) intervals to define the accumulated volume capacity of the

Middle and East Arms (Hogarth and Caland Pit Lakes; Capper, 1978). The Regional Engineering model (1986) refers to the Steep Rock Resources model for information on stored water volumes below 200 masl. Above 200 masl the volume calculation was based on a 30 m contour intervals with linear interpolation between the contours at a 1 m interval in the form of a look up table

(MNR, 1986). The Regional Engineering model (1986) predicts a slightly slower rebound rate than that of Capper (1978), but in general predicted water elevations have been within 1 to 2 m of measured elevations (Figs. 2.3 and 2.4) Rebound models by Vancook (2002) and Jackson

(2007) do not accurately predict water levels (Figs. 2.3 and 2.4).

The differences in the water level predictions between the Regional Engineering Model

(1986), Vancook (2002), and Jackson (2007) reflects differences in the modeling methods.

Unlike the Regional Model, a water balance was not calculated as part of the determination of the rebound rates calculated by Vancook (2002) and Jackson (2007). Vancook (2002) assumes a linear rate of increase in water elevation overtime based on measured elevation changes that were relatively constant between 1982 and 2004. This model is flawed because volume calculations show an increase in volume with elevation. Thus if inflowing water volumes remain relatively constant a decrease in the rate of elevation increase is expected. Prior to 1993, when the open pits were much narrower with steeper pit walls (below 270 masl) a near linear increase in water elevations occurred. Above 270 masl a decrease in slope occurs as the pit walls widen 61 and begin to follow the contours of the former lakebed until the former Steep Rock Lake shoreline is reached. Figure 3.17 shows the irregularities in the pit lakes, especially in Caland.

The volume of Caland pit lake significantly changes again at ~ 300 masl when the pit lake surface begins to move to the southwest following the original flow path in the former Steep

Rock Lake (Figs. 1.3 and 3.17). The quicker rate of rebound predicted by Vancook (2002) results from the assumption that the water elevation increases linearly based on water levels below 300 m. Where head-independent flows predominate or where water availability depends on a remote source for instance where a surface water course cascades into an open pit, rebound is likely to approximately be linear (Younger et al, 2000). Thus the linear model of Vancook (2002) inherently assumes that head-independent flows predominate. However, head-dependent inflows are significant in the study area. The study area is known to have high groundwater inflows since groundwater inflow hindered underground mining and was a major factor leading to the Seine

River Diversion (Capper, 1978). Jackson's (2007) rebound model did not used stage-volume relationships for the entire pit volume. The volume of the pit lake is only calculated from 210 m contour and above for each pit lake. The annual inflow rate is calculated by dividing the volume between two elevations by the number of years required to fill that volume for three different periods of time where measured elevations were close to contour elevations. The average annual volume of water entering the pit lakes is then assumed to be constant. The approach to predict rebound used in Models 3 A and is similar to that used by Vancook (2002) in that an equation was fitted to measured water levels. However, instead of a linear equation like Vancook (2002),

Models 3A and 3B fit an exponential curve to water level data. Fitting an exponential curve to measured water elevations by simple regression is a method of predicting rebound where head- dependent flows are significant and is more likely to be successful in large systems (Younger et al., 2002). 62

A Hogarth

South East ArmK Fairweather Lake

South ' Area between pit Roberts lakes that will flood

As previously stated, head-dependent inflows are significant for Hogarth and Caland. Head- dependent inflows represent water flowing from adjoining aquifers, where the rate of inflow depends on the degree to which the hydraulic head of the aquifer exceeds the head elevation plus atmospheric pressure in the mine void (Younger et al., 2002). The difference in head decreases with time, leading to a slow reduction in inflow rate and a deceleration of water level rise. Such a pattern is seen in the water level predictions made by the rebound models by Capper (1978),

MNR (1986), and Jackson (2007) as well as this study. Where head-independent flows predominate or where water availability depends on a remote source, for instance where a surface watercourse cascades into an open pit, rebound is likely to be approximately linear

(Younger et al., 2002). Although Caland does receive more surface water runoff than Hogarth, head-dependent inflows are still a significant factor. Generally, rebound curves for most systems fall between an exponential and linear curve and can show stepwise jumps where mine void volume changes (Younger et al., 2002). In addition, the use of simple regression to predict pit lake rebound rates inherently assumes that the factors controlling the rebound rate remain constant, which is not the case in Caland and Hogarth (see section 3.8.1).

The water balance equation used in Models 1A, IB, 2A and 2B is from Shevenell

(2000a). This study follows the general approach used by Shevenell (2000a), for Gretchell Mine pit lakes, Nevada, however, the determination of some parameters in the water balance and the method used to calculate pit volumes differ slightly (e.g., the equation for an ellipse is used to represent the surface areas, the volume is calculated in successive layers downward at a 15 mm height increment, and the length and width of the ellipse is determined assuming a slope of 40°).

Also, there are major differences between the study area under consideration here and that of

Shevenell (2000a). First, the Gretchell pit lakes only lose water via evaporation and lateral groundwater flow and the pit lakes are considered full when the change in storage equals zero. 64

Caland and Hogarth are expected to outflow into the West Arm and, therefore, the model ends when the water levels reach the outlet elevation. Secondly, Gretchell pit lakes have previously filled and been drained, and have a record of data on water elevation through time from when the pit lakes previously flooded. Water levels in the Gretchell pit lakes were observed to follow a hyperbolic function and this curve is compared to other analytical models prepared for Gretchell pit lakes that use different approaches to model groundwater inflows. It was found that model results were not unique and measured water levels can be predicted relatively well using a number of groundwater inflow and outflow assumptions (Shevenell, 2000a). From 1979 to 2011, many of this study's models reasonably predicted water levels that were close to measured water levels. The differences between water level predictions in Models 1 A, IB, 2A and 2B only reflect differences in the calibration method, as all other parameters are the same.

In Models 1A, IB, 2A and 2C the groundwater water flux term is used to calibrate the rebound models. Model 1A and IB are calibrated by adjusting the net groundwater flux term by trial and error but the lengths of the calibration periods are different (see section 3.4.4). Models

2A and 2B are calibrated by determining the net groundwater flux term difference using the equation from Shevenell (2000a) over calibration periods of different lengths (see section 3.4.4).

The different calibration methods resulted in different net groundwater flux values used in the water budget calculations (Table 3.3). The groundwater influx values calculated in Model 1A and IB are significantly lower than those calculated in Models 2A and 2B. The differences in predicted rebound rates correlate to the differences in the groundwater influx rates (Tables 3.2 and 3.3).

Similar to the Regional Engineering model, Models 1 A, IB, 2A and 3B calculate a water budget, but differ in the method of defining the stage-volume relationships. This study's rebound models uses a hypsographic curve and a surface area - elevation curve to model the stage - 65 volume relationships. The stage-volume relationships in the Regional Engineering model are listed in a look up table containing elevation, surface area and volume data. The table was created by using linear interpolation at a 1 m interval between each of the contours of the pit lakes (MNR, 1986). Results of the sensitivity analysis suggest the differences in predicted rebound rates are the result of the different methods used to define the stage-volume relationships and that linear interpolation is more accurate, particularly for Caland (see section

3.9.2).

The hypsometic curves and elevation-surface area curves for Caland initially under estimate measured levels then overestimate levels after ~ 330 masl (Figs. 3.1 and 3.3). On the other hand,

Hogarth curves initially are close to measured levels until -330 masl, after which the curve overestimate values (Figs.3.2 and 3.4). Thus water elevations during particular time periods are over and underestimated. To assess if this is a problem inherent to hypsometic curves and elevation-surface area curves, a rebound model with pit geometry modeled using the linear interpolation method at a 1 m interval was derived. This rebound models used the same water balance parameter values as the other models and an assumed groundwater influx rate of 100 gpm(US). The assumed groundwater influx is close to that estimated by the Steep Rock

Environmental Plan and the Regional Engineering Model for Caland of 95 gpm and 90 gpm

(Capper 1978; MNR 1986). The revised rebound model predicted similar rebound rate to Models

2A and 2B with the pit lake joining in 2057 and the combined lake outflowing in 2077 (see

Appendix VI). The difference between the predicted joining dates of Models 2A and 2B and the rebound model that used linear interpolation to model pit geometry suggests that the later predicts incremental water elevations more accurately because the over/under estimation is resolved but both methods produced similar rebound rates for when the pit lake overflow into the

West Arm. Based on these results, hypsometic curves should not be used where the slopes of the 66 pit walls varies over time, as see in Caland and Hogarth (Fig. 3.17) because the curves will over- and underestimate water elevations at different points in time.

3.9.2 Sensitivity Analysis

All the rebound models in this study predict a longer rebound rate than the Regional

Engineering model's prediction of 90 years from mine closure. Models 1A and 2B predictions match 2011 measured values better than the Regional Engineering model. The predictions by

Model 2A are the closest at 99 years from mine closure, which has the highest groundwater influx rate of this study's models. In addition to the differences in the stage-volume relationships as discussed previously, some parameters used in the water balances of this study differ from

Regional Engineering model. The retention factors used in both models are the same (40%); however, the sensitivity analysis suggests that even small changes in the value can result in significant changes to the rebound rate. For example, a 5% increase or decrease in the retention factor would change the rebound rate by 7 years (Fig. 3.14). No effort has been made to estimate the retention factor of the land since the surrender report by the MNR (1986) and the growth of vegetation on the property since mine closure likely has changed the amount of surface runoff.

The precipitation rate used in the Regional Engineering model is 728.9 mm/year (28.7 in), slightly lower than that in this study, 739.6 mm/year. The difference between the two precipitation rates is approximately 1.4%. However, the sensitivity analysis indicates that this difference in precipitation rate would probably account for only a 1 -year variance in the rebound rate (Fig. 3.13). The precipitation rate used in this study is likely a better estimate since it is based on the 1971 to 2000 Climate Normals. Also, this study uses measured precipitation values for a longer period of time. The evaporation rate used in the Regional Engineering model is

457.2 mm/year, close to the average evaporation rate of 461 mm/year calculated for 1966 to

1988 and lower than the average evaporation rate of 511.4 mm/year for 1979 to 1988 used in this 67 study. The difference between the evaporation rate used in this study and that of the Regional

Engineering model is approximately 11%. Based on the sensitivity analysis, this difference would result in about a 2-year increase in the rebound rate (Fig. 3.15). Furthermore, the difference between the determined Penman potential evapotranspiration rate, 548 mm/year, and the average evaporation rate used in this study, 511.4 mm/year, is 7% and would results in about

1- or 2-years decrease in the rebound rate based on sensitivity analysis results. Thus the use of the Penman equation to estimate evaporation for years with missing data would likely have little influence on the predicted rate of rebound.

The amount of seepage that was determined to enter the pit lakes in the Regional

Engineering model, approximately 129,210 m3/year into the East Arm and 179,215 m3/year into the Middle Arm, which are 91% and 71 %, respectively, lower than the net groundwater flux values determined in Model 2B (Table 3.2). Based on the sensitivity analysis, these differences in groundwater flow rates would result in a rebound rate approximately a 9 to 16 year longer and close to the 18 year difference between the Regional Engineering model rebound and Model 2B

(Fig. 3.16). However, the seepage rates in the Regional Engineering model are much lower than those in this study and one would expect that the Regional Engineering model's rebound rate predictions to be slower slonger than those in this study. But in fact the model's predicted rebound rate is shorter than those predicted by the models in this study.

The results of the sensitivity analysis suggest that the differences in the precipitation and evaporations rates used in this study and the Regional Engineering model are not significant enough to account for the 18-year difference in predicted rebound rates. The results of the sensitivity analysis contradict what one would expected based on the differences in the net groundwater flux and seepage values determined in this study and the Regional Engineering model. Because the determination of the net groundwater influx in this study is based on the 68 stage-volume relationships, this contradiction suggests that the different approach used to define the pit geometry between the this study and the Regional Engineering model accounts for the difference in the predicted rebound. In addition, the R2 value for the Caland hypsometric curve is

0.88 much lower than that of Hogarth at 0.95. Examination of the Caland hypsometric curve indicates that the volume of Caland pit lake is overestimated by the hypsographic curve.

Therefore, since the Regional Engineering models' Caland pit volume, determined using linear interpolation, is likely more accurate than that determined in this study, the longer rebound rates predicted in this study are probably the results of a difference in calculated pit volumes. A simple model of the pit lake stage volume relationships was used in this study in order to assess if simple models could provide accurate volume calculations. Based on these results, simple methods of modeling pit lake stage-volume relationships should not be used, particularly for

Caland pit.

An attempt has been made to estimate errors associated to rebound model predictions based on the sensitivity analysis results. Estimating the error associated to the rebound models is difficult because of the number of assumptions required to construct the models, the use of estimated data and because model parameters vary overtime. To determine an at best error in the estimated rebound rates, an average of the number of years difference in the rebound rate resulting from a 5% change in parameter values. The upper limit of error or worst case scenario for an the amount of error in the rebound rates was determined by averaging the number of years difference in rebound rates resulting from a the lowest percent change in parameters values that created significant differences in rebound rates (> 5 year difference). Significant changes occurred in the rebound rate when precipitation values change by 10%, evaporation by 30%, runoff by 10% and groundwater by 70%. Based on the sensitivity analysis results, at best the models likely have an error of about +/- 3 years and, at worst an error of about +/- 10 years. 69

3.9.3 Model Limitations

There are a number of data limitations with respect to rebound and water balance models in this study. In the water balance model the meteorological data available was limited.

Evaporation data was not available for Atikokan after 1988. Annual precipitation values had to be estimated for a period of time during the calibration period, 1988 to 1994, because of availability and quality. The difference between the calculated average evaporation rate and

Penman estimates (7%) results in a two year or less increase in rebound rate. The use of Penman estimates in future studies may improve the accuracy of the calculated net groundwater influx in

Model 2A and 2B by providing evaporation rates that vary each year reflecting meteorological conditions, as opposed to an average rate. However, the solar radiation data required for the

Penman calculation was taken from a weather station located more than 800 km away from

Atikokan and therefore the Penman estimates are not based on study site conditions. The difference between measured and predicted precipitation rates is typically 13% and, based on the sensitivity analysis would result in an approximately 9-year difference in rebound rates.

However, the use of the estimated precipitation values may have improved the calibration by providing precipitation rates that vary from year to year based on meteorological conditions, as opposed to an average rate.

The use of measured precipitation and evaporation data is important in the calibration of rebound models, especially in Model 2A and 2B that are calibrated by calculating the net groundwater influx by difference, because known evaporation and precipitation estimates increase the accuracy of the net groundwater flux calculation. The calculation of the groundwater influx in rebound models Model 1 A, IB, 2A and 2B is also limited by sporadic measurements of the pit lake surface elevation over the calibration period. Furthermore the number of sequential 70 years with measured elevations and measured annual precipitation and evaporation values are few.

The percentage of precipitation entering the pit lakes as runoff was assumed to be the same as in the Regional Engineering model however this value may no longer be representative of the amount of water entering into the pits now. Since mine closure the amount of vegetation on the property has increased which has likely changed the amount of runoff from the Caland and Hogarth watersheds.

The initial volume of the pit lakes at the start of the rebound model was determined using the measured pit lake water elevations and the stage-volume relationships. The water elevation of

Caland at the time of mine closure in 1979 is unknown.

Large open pit lakes of complex geometry are difficult to simulate (Sinton, et al., 2002).

In this study the stage-volume relationships are two exponential curves, a hypsometric curve and an elevation versus surface area curve. The R2 values for the hypsometric and elevation versus surface area curves, respectively, for Caland are 0.882 and 0.9841 and for Hogarth 0.9525 and

0.9546. The R2 value for the Hogarth hypsometric curve (0.9525) is higher than that for Caland

(0.882) indicating the hypsometric curves provide a better representation of the pit volume with elevation for Hogarth than for Caland. Examination of the hypsometric curve indicates that the curve overestimates the volume of Caland (Fig. 3.1). Thus the models will inherently predict a longer rebound rate because more water is required to fill the pit. The R values and the sensitivity analysis results suggest that the use of linear interpolation to define pit volumes, as in the Regional Engineering model (1986), is more accurate than the hypsometric curves used in this study, especially for Caland. The pit lake volume estimates affect the calculated net groundwater influx in Models 1 A, IB, 2A and 2B and result in an overestimate of the groundwater influx rates. 71

3.10 Conclusions

The rebound model 2B is the best overall rebound model for Caland and Hogarth pit lakes based on comparisons to measured water levels and the Regional Engineering model predictions that have proven to be reasonably accurate. Model 2B predicts that Caland will flow into

Hogarth in 2070 and that the new Steep Rock Pit Lake will outflow into the West Arm in 2087,

13 and 18 years, respectively, longer than the Regional Models predictions. Based on the sensitivity analysis results, the difference between the Model 2B predictions and the Regional

Engineering model predictions can be attributed to the manner in which the pit volumes are calculated because the differences between the water balance parameter values used in the models cannot account for the 18-year difference in the prediction rebound rate.

In this study, the relationships between the accumulated volume, surface area and elevation, are modeled by fitting exponential curves to measured data as described in section 3.3.

The Regional Engineering model defines the pit volumes using linear interpolation at a 1 m scale between contour elevations. The stage-volume relationships for Hogarth pit lake appear to be more accurate than for Caland, suggesting that at minimum linear interpolation should be used to define the volume in Caland pit lake. In general, hypsometic curves should not be used where the slopes of the pit walls varies over time, as see in Caland and Hogarth (Fig. 3.17) because the curves will over- and underestimate water elevations at different points in time. However, the overall rebound rates, when the pit lakes reach their outlet, predicted using the hypsometic curves and linear interpolation produce similar results. 72

Chapter 4: Hydrodynamic Modeling

The nature of mixing that occurs between the upper and lower layers of a lake and the cycling of nutrients as well as other chemical species is controlled by the physical limnology of the pit lake (Castendyk & Eary, 2009). Thus, knowledge of the likely long-term hydrologic behaviour of pit lakes is important when developing a management or remediation strategy for pit lakes. The hydrologic behaviour of pit lakes influences water quality and whether or not stored toxic material migrates to the surface and is released. The high depth to surface area ratio of pit lakes compared to natural lakes promotes density stratification, where the dense bottom layer is not involved in seasonal overturn. This is called meromictic stratification. In a meromictic lake, the bottom layer, the monimolimnion, remains stagnant and where sulphide- bearing minerals exist, reducing conditions can prevent the production of acidic waters

(Castendyk and Webster-Brown, 2007). An unexpected turnover event in a meromictic lake can bring stagnant bottoms waters to the surface, which may result in adverse environmental impacts

(Castendyk and Webster-Brown, 2007). Alternatively, the entire water column of a pit lake can be involved in seasonal overturn resulting in holomictic stratification. In these lakes, overturn can bring oxygen in contact with stored tailings allowing oxidation of sulphide minerals (if present) in the tailings (Younger et al., 2000).

For these reasons, an effort should be made to model future pit lake conditions where water quality may be an issue in order to avoid any short- or long-term adverse environmental impacts. The Dynamic Reservoir Simulation Model (DYRESM) from the Centre for Water

Research at the University of Western Australia (www.cwr.uwa.edu.ca) has successfully reproduced observed conditions in a number of pit lakes including: Brenda Lake in British

Columbia (Hamblin et al., 1999); the Island Copper Lake in British Columbia (Fisher, 2002); 73 Dexter lake in Nevada (Balistrierier al., 2006); and, a coal mine lake in Western Australia (Ivey et al., 2006).

The objective of this chapter is to use DYRESM to conducted preliminary simulations of the future limnology of Caland and Hogarth pit lakes in order to investigate if changes in the hydrology of the pit lakes during rebound will affect the stratification of the pit lakes. Each pit lake is modeled individually, using a number of different scenarios. The modeling scenarios are designed to simulate current conditions and predict future conditions at key points during the rebound process (i.e., when Caland and Hogarth pit lakes join, and when the joined pit lake over flows into the West Arm of Steep Rock Lake).

This study is the first to attempt to model the hydrodynamics of Caland and Hogarth pit lakes. The modeling effort will serve to assess whether there is sufficient data available for the pit lakes to accurately model the behaviour of the pit lakes hydrodynamics. DYRESM was also be used to model the future toxicity of the pit lakes based on predicted salinity values.

4.1 Conceptual Model

Three periods, or scenarios, during the process of water level rebound are investigated in this study: i) current conditions; ii) when Caland begins to flow into Hogarth; and, iii) when

Caland and Hogarth pit lakes are combined and outflow into the West Arm of Steep Rock Lake.

All simulations for Caland are run of 160 days and for Hogarth 158 days. The Hogarth simulations are run for a shorter period of time because surface water temperatures dropped below zero and terminated the simulation when the simulation period was 160 days long. The first scenario models the initial water levels are equal to 2008 (313.0 masl) and 2007 (306.9 masl) water levels for Caland and Hogarth, respectively. The 2007 and 2008 water levels correspond to the years the in situ measurements used for constructing the initial profiles were taken. In the second scenario, the water level in Caland is assumed to be 385 masl and the water 74 level is Hogarth is assumed to be 366.5 masl as predicted by Model 2B when Caland's water level reaches 385 masl. In the third scenario, the water level in both pit lakes is assumed to be

394 masl. The three scenarios are described in greater detail in section 4.4.

4.2 Description of the Limnological Program DYRESM

The DYRESM-CAEDYM (Dynamic Reservoir Simulation Model - Computation

Aquatic Ecosystem Dynamic Model) package release 4.0.0 beta-2 by Imberger and Patterson

(1981) and the Centre for Water Research at the University of Western Australia

(www.cwr.uwa.edu.ca) is used in this study. DYRESM is a one-dimensional hydrodynamic model for predicting the vertical distribution of temperature, salinity and density in lakes and reservoirs that satisfy the one-dimensional assumption (Imerito, 2007a). The one-dimensional assumption assumes that vertical variation is greater than horizontal variation. This gives rise to a layered structure whereby a lake is modeled as a series of horizontal layers. The one- dimensional assumption is valid when forces destabilizing the water column do not act over a long period of time (Imerito, 2007). The restriction to vertical variation in the water column is least problematic in pit lakes because of their high depth to width ratio (Hamblin et al., 1999).

The hydrodynamic component of the model is process based, not empirical, and is unique in that it does not require calibration (Imerito, 2007; CWR, 2002). The data requirements for the model are basin geometry, hydrology and surface meteorology (Imerito, 2007). The model is initialized with field observations and is run over a simulation period. The layer structure of DYRESM assumes there is no lateral variation in the layers. The layers differ in thickness, and vary in thickness to accommodate volumes changes in response to inflows and outflows.

4.3 Description of DYRESM Input Files and Their Creation

The DYRESM computer model parameterizes the main physical processes leading to temporal changes in the salinity, density and temperature distributions in lakes and reservoirs 75 (CWR, 2002). The DYRESM computer program requires a number of input text files and data preparation programs. First, all data relating to meteorological, morphometry, inflows and outflows covering all possible days of the simulation are written into a netCDF filed called the

Reference file (Ref file). The Ref file and remaining input text files are translated into another netCDF file called the Simulation file (Sim file). The Sim file is compiled using the graphical user interface. Then the Sim file is visualized with Modeller v2b2 by the Centre for Water

Research and the University of Western Australia.

The following provides a brief description of each input file and a general description of how parameters within each file were determined where applicable. See the DYRESM User

Manual (CWR, 2002) for a more detailed description of the parameters in the DYRESM input files. Example input files can be found in Appendix VI.

4.3.1 Configuration

The DYRESM configuration file (* .cfg) contains configuration information for a particular simulation. The configuration data for Caland and Hogarth remains the same for all simulations. All simulations begin on May 25 and run for 160 days in Caland and 158 days in

Hogarth. Hogarth simulations prematurely terminate when surface temperatures were below zero, thus the simulation period was shortened. The configuration file requires a value for the light extinction coefficient (irf' ), a measure of the ability of a water sample to exponentially attenuate light shinning on its surface. The light extinction coefficient has not been measured for either Caland or Hogarth. The light extinction coefficient was estimated by comparing the average secchi depths for Caland (3.9 m) and Hogarth (3.3 m; from Gould 2008), to other lakes with measured secchi depths and light extinction coefficient available on Water on the Web

(http://www.waterontheweb.org/under/lakeecology/04_light.html; Accessed: July 21, 2011). The light extinction coefficient value of 0.82 m"1 is similar to values seen in two mesotrophic lakes 76 with similar secchi disk depths, Grindstone Lake, Pine Country Minnesota and Ice Lake, Itasca

Country, Minnesota that have light extinction coefficients of 0.82 and 0.83 and secchi depths of

3 to 6 m and 2 to 5 m, respectively.

4.3.2 Physical Data and Lake Morphometry

The physical data and lake morphometry file (*.stg) contains information describing the characteristics of the water body. Most information included in this file remains the same for all simulations with the exception of data regarding inflows. For surface inflows the streambed half angle was calculated based on field measurements of cross-sections taken of surface seeps running into Hogarth pit lake. All surface inflows are assumed to equal the average streambed half angle that was calculated to be 74.7°. Streambed slope is taken from dip measurements and is also arbitrarily defined to represent streams that inflow at angles steeper than those measured where cross-sections could be completed. The streambed drag coefficient is assumed to be 0.015

(CWR, 2002). For groundwater inflows or inflows below the lake surface, the elevation of the inflow into the pit lake was arbitrarily set at 1 m from the bottom of the pit lake and is varied to see if the groundwater entrance height influenced on the simulation results.

For each pit lake, the crest of the lake above mean sea level is assumed to equal the water elevation in the West Arm, 390 masl. The Crest Elevation or elevation of the height of the

Narrows Dam, the elevation of the outflow point to the West Arm is 394 masl (R. Purdon, pers. comm., Jan 2011). Caland is assumed to have one outlet at 385 masl, corresponding to when

Caland flows into Hogarth. Hogarth only has one outlet to the West Arm at 394 masl. The physical data and lake morphometry file also includes a matrix of height-area data that describes the hypsographic curves of the water body. For each pit this data was taken from the pit geometry described in section 3.2. The lowest elevation for each pit defines the respective zero height elevation. 77 4.3.3 Initial Profile

The initial profile file (*.pro) contains the initial vertical profile of water temperature and salinity. The variables are measured values and not derived by DYRESM. The height of each layer is relative to the zero height elevation. The vertical profile of temperature and conductivity values for Caland and Hogarth were taken from Hydrolab Surveyor data collected in spring of

2007 and 2008, respectively (Gould, 2008; Godwin, 2010). Salinity values for the initial profile were then calculated using the in situ conductivity measurements and the Practical Salinity Scale

1978 and its extension to lower salinities (UNESCO, 1978; Eaton et al., 2005). In order to simulate future conditions, the height of the measurements in the water column are adjusted so that the initial water elevation in the profiles matched the initial water elevations assumed in each scenario (see section 4.1). The depths of the initial profile measurements below the initial surface water level were assumed to be at the same relative to the lake surface but their elevations increased to higher levels in the water column given the initial water levels for scenarios 2 and 3 (see section 4.1). The Hogarth and Caland pit lake profiles have not changed since 2004 and, therefore it is assumed that the profiles will continue to remain the same in the future (Vancook, 2005; Gould, 2008; Godwin 2010; Conly and Lee, Unpublished Data).

4.3.4 Meteorological Data

The meteorological data file (*.met) contains surface meteorological data that covers the span of the simulation period on a daily or sub-daily interval. Data required in this file includes: input timestep, type of long-wave radiation data, sensor type and a table with each column representing a parameter and each row a specific timestep. A daily time step is used, as sub-daily data for all required parameters is not available for the study site. Cloud cover, instead of measured values, is selected as the type of long wave radiation because long wave radiation is not measured at weather stations near the study site. A fixed height sensor is selected for the type 78 of sensor because the meteorological data is taken from fixed weather stations as opposed to a floating sensor that would be located on the lake surface. Each time step includes an ordinal date, shortwave radiation, cloud cover, air temperature, vapour pressure and wind speed values averaged over the timestep. Data is from the National Climate Data and Information Archive for the period from 1985 to 1987, as this period had datasets for all required parameters. The data covered in the meteorological file is not from the same period as the initial profile data because solar radiation and evaporation data was not available in 2007 and 2008. Hourly wind speed and relative humidity and daily mean temperature and total precipitation data was available online from the National Climate Data and Information Archive for the weather station Atikokan

(climate ID 6020379). Mean daily temperature values were added directly to the meteorological file from the National Climate Data and Information Archive files available online. The hourly data for relative humidity and wind speed was averaged on a daily basis. The temperature and relative humidity values were used as a basis to calculate vapour pressure following the equation provided in the DYRESM User Manual (CWR, 2002). The global solar radiation and cloud cover data was acquired from National Climate Data and Information Archive. Short wave radiation was determined by summing global solar radiation data for the day. The nearest weather station to Atikokan, Ontario with short wave radiation data is Moosonee, Ontario

(climate ID 6075425, approximately 840 km north east of Atikokan). Cloud cover data is available for three stations, Thunder Bay, Kenora and Sioux Lookout weather stations, all of which are within 250 km of Atikokan. Climate normal data for cloud cover for each location was compared and monthly cloud cover distributions in Atikokan were found to be similar to

Thunder Bay (climate ID 6048261). 79 4.3.5 Stream Inflow

The stream inflow file (*.inf) contains the following data for each inflow for each day of the simulation: daily average volume of water entering the pits, temperature and salinity. Streams into Caland and Hogarth are not gauged and there is considerable overland flow into the pits.

Therefore, inflows are calculated using the water balance Model 2b results and the following equation provided in the DYRESM user manual (CWR, 2002):

Inflow = Astorage + outflow + evaporation - rainfall (Eqn. 4.1)

Where: Astorage = storagefinai - storageinitjai Outflow, evaporation and rainfall are all non-negative quantities

Inflows into the pits include groundwater and surface inflows. The annual groundwater volume for both Caland and Hogarth is taken from Model 2b of the water balance and is divided by 365 days to find a daily average volume of groundwater inflow for the year of interest. The temperature of the groundwater inflow was estimated to be 3°C based on a map of average shallow groundwater temperatures in the United State (http://www.epa.gov/athens/learn2model

/part-two/onsite/ex/jne_ henrys_map.html: Accessed July 25, 2011 at 3:30 pm EST). Shallow groundwater is defined as groundwater that can be reached through dug wells in areas where recent precipitation is trapped underground. Compared to measured water column temperature, the groundwater temperature is 1 to 2°C cooler than the water temperatures at the bottom of the pit lake. The salinity of the groundwater is assumed to remain constant and was calculated from the conductivity measurement of a water sample taken by Godwin (2010) in a well at the airport in Atikokan. The groundwater salinity is 0.43 psu.

An annual inflow value for both Caland and Hogarth is calculated for a year of interest.

The volume of inflowing water distributed over the simulation period is a percentage based on the monthly distribution of precipitation for Atikokan based on the Canadian Climate Normals 80 for 1971 to 2000 from the National Climate Data and Information Archives. It was assumed that overland inflows do no flow during the winter (November to March) and that the accumulated volume during the winter period will enter the pit as spring runoff (April - June). The volume of water accumulated during the winter period was summed together and divided by three and then added to the inflow totals for April, May and June. The daily average inflow volumes are calculated for April to October by dividing the total for each month by the number of days in that month. The salinity of the input waters is calculated from laboratory conductivity measurements taken from 2008 samples of surface streams (Gould, 2008, Godwin 2010) flowing into the pits using the Practical Salinity Scale 1978 and its extension to lower salinities (UNESCO, 1978;

Eaton et al., 2005). Caland pit lake has two inflow types: i) low salinity inflow of fresh waters, and ii) high salinity inflow of water that is reacting with tailings/waste rock associated catchment. There is only one inflow source to Hogarth pit that flows for most of the year from spring to fall. There are a number of other seeps that enter Hogarth pit; however, flow only occurs after rain events. In some simulations additional inflows were added to simulate the addition of inflow from Fairweather into Caland and from the Rawn Reservoir into the South

East Arm and will be described in sections 4.3.1, 4.3.2 and 4.3.3.

4.3.6 Withdrawals

The withdrawals file (*.wdr) contains daily withdrawal volume (m3) for the duration of the simulation period. The file consists of daily outflow volumes from the lake for individual outlets. The number of withdrawls must equal the number of outlets indicated in the physical data and morphometry file. Depending on the simulation, the pits were modeled with and without outflows as described in sections 4.3.1, 4.3.2 and 4.3.3. For Caland, the withdrawal volume was assumed to equal the change in storage volume of the pit when it reaches an elevation of 385 masl in the water balance Model 2b. For Hogarth, the withdrawal volume was 81 assumed to equal the change in storage volume of the pit lakes after they reach an elevation of

394 masl in water balance Model 2b.

4.3.7 Parameters

The parameter file (*.par) included, but was not limited to, time of day for output, buoyant plume entrainment coefficient, emissivity of a water surface, mean albedo of water and critical wind speed. A complete list of parameters and an example of a parameter file are provided in Appendix VI. With the exception of the time of day, the values for the other parameters in this file correspond to values recommended by the Centre for Water Research

(CWR, 2002). The time of day for output is adjusted to 1 pm because in situ measurements of the water column have historically been done beginning at 1 pm or later in the afternoon.

4.4 Simulated Scenarios

A number of different simulations are created to investigate three specific points of interest during the rebound process in Caland and Hogarth pit lakes. The first scenario was designed to assess if DYRESM can model current conditions in Caland and Hogarth pit lakes. The second scenario consists of a series of simulations that were designed to predict the future limnology of the pit lakes when Caland outflows into Hogarth. The third scenario involves simulations to predict the future limnology of the pit lakes when the rebound processes is complete and the joined pit lakes outflow into the West Arm. Each pit lake is modeled separately in DYRESM.

Tables 4.1 and 4.2 provide summaries of each simulation for Caland and Hogarth, respectively.

4.4.1 Scenario 1 - Current Conditions

In this scenario water surface elevations are below the outlet elevation at 385 masl; and

Caland and Hogarth only lose water via evaporation and receive water from precipitation and inflows. The calculation of the amount of water entering the pit from groundwater and inflows is described in section 4.2.5. In Caland, the volume of inflowing water is divided between a hi] salinity (0.51 psu) inflow and a lower salinity (0.18 psu) inflow based on two samples from streams known as Caland Seep 5 and Seep 1, respectively (Godwin, 2010). Hogarth has one inflow (Hogarth Seep 2a), which has a relatively high salinity of 1.35 psu.

Table 4.1: Summary of DYRESM simulations for Caland pit lake.

Caland Groundwater Scenario Inflows On tlets Com merrts Simulations Entrance Height

ICib 100 m low salinity seep (0.18 psu); IClc 10m Assess the affect of groundwater entrance height on Caland 1 high salinity seep (0.51 psu); none ICld 140 m limnology. groundwater (0.43 psu) ICle 200 m low salinity seep (0.18 psu); high salinity seep (0.51 psu). Assess the affect of inflow from Faireweather Lake on the limnology 1 Cv2 I none 100 m groundwater (0.43 psu); ofCaland. Fairweather Lake (0.18 psu) low salinity seep (0.18 psu); 2C1 2 high salinity seep (0.51 psu); at 385 masl 100 m «roundwater (0.43 psu) Assess the aflect of groundwater entrance height on Caland low salinity seep (0.18 psu), limnology. 2C2 2 high salinity seep (0.51 psu); at 385 masl 10m uroundwater (0.43 psu) low salinity seep (0.18 psu); high salinity seep (0.51 psu); Assess the affect of inflow from Faireweather Lake on the limnology 2Cv2 2 at 385 mas! 1 00 m groundwater (0.43 psu); ofCaland. Fairweather Lake (0.18 dsu) low salinity seep (0.18 psu); high salinity seep (0.51 psu), 2Cv3 2 at 385 masl 100 in A slower rebound rate is used in the water volume calculations. groundwater (0.43 psu); Fairweather Lake (0.18 psu) low salinity seep (0.18 psu); high salinity seep (0.51 psu), 3C_lout 3 at 385 masl 100 m Predicts the future limnology ofCaland. groundwater (0.43 psu); Fairweather Lake (0.18 psu) low salinity seep (0.18 psu), high salinity seep (0.51 psu), groundwater (0.43 psu); Assess the ailect of increased inflow volumes into the Southeast Arm 3Cv3_ lout 3 at 385 masl 100 m Fairweather Lake (0.18 psu); irom the Rawn Reseroir on the future Caland limnology. inflow from Rawn Reservoir (0.18 psu)

Table 4.2: Summary of DYRESM simulations for Hogarth pit lake.

Hogarth Groundwater Scenario Inflows Outlets Comments Simulations Entrance Height

IHlb 100 m seep (0.4 psu); groundwater Assess the affect of groundwater entrance height on Hogarth 1112 1 none 10 m (0.43 psu) limnology. 1H3 180 m seep (0.4 psu), groundwater 1HHSGW (2.4 psu) I none 100 m Assess the affect of groundwater salinity on Hogarth limnology. seep (0.4 psu); groundwater 1H_MSGW (1.3 psu) seep (0.4 psu); groundwater 2H1 2 (0.43 psu); Caland inflow none 100 tn (0.35 psu) Assess the affect of groundwater entrance height on Hogarth seep (0.4 psu); groundwater limnology. Note that the Caland inflow salinity varies overtime. 2Hlb 2 (0.43 psu); Caland inflow none 180 m (0.35 psu) seep (0.4 psu); groundwater 2H2 2 (0.43 psu); Caland inflow none 100 m (0.37 psu) Assess the aflect ofCaland inflow salinity on Hogarth limnology. seep (0.4 psu); groundwater 2H3 2 (0.43 psu); Caland inflow none 100 in (0.41 psu) Assess the affect of the Caland on Hogarth limnology when inflow seep (0.4 psu); groundwater 2Hv2 2 none 100 m from Faireweather Lake is added to Caland. Note that the Caland (0.43 psu); Caland inflow inflow salinity varies overtime. seep (0.4 psu); groundwater A slower rebound rate is used in the water volume calculations. Note 2Hv3 2 none 100 m (0.43 psu); Caland inflow that the Caland inflow salinity varies overtime. seep (0.4 psu); groundwater Predicts the future limnology of Hogarth. Note that the Caland inflow 3Hv2 at 394 masl 100 m (0.43 psu); Caland inflow salinitv varies overtime. Assess the aflect of increased inflow volumes into the Southeast Ann seep (0.4 psu); groundwater 3Hv3 3 at 394 masl 100 m torn the Rawn Reseroir on the future Hogarth limnology. Note that (0.43 psu); Caland inflow the Caland inflow salinitv varies overtime. 83 Groundwater entering both pits is assumed to have the same salinity and temperature with the exception of two Hogarth simulations described below. Since water only exits via evaporation, no withdrawls are taken from either pit lake in this scenario. The simulations for Caland are initialized with spring 2008 in situ conductivity measurements assuming a water surface elevation of 313.9 masl measured for that year. The simulations for Hogarth were initialized with spring 2007 in situ conductivity measurements and an initial water surface elevation of 306.9 m.

The actual entrance elevation of groundwater entry is unknown so a number of different simulations were run with groundwater entering at different heights to see if there was any effect on the limnology. Caland simulations lClb, IClc, ICld, lCle vary the groundwater entrance height from 100 m, 10 m 140 m and 200 m, respectively. An additional model for Caland, 1CV2 adds an inflow into Caland from Fairweather Lake to see if the limnology of Caland would be impacted by increased freshwater inflow into the pit lake. In this simulation, the temperature of the inflow over the course of the simulation was the average of 1 m, 2 m and 5 m water temperatures from simulation lClb. Therefore, the temperature of the water inflowing into

Caland from Fairweather was higher than that of the seeps, which have temperatures equal to the air temperatures during the simulation. The salinity of the Fairweather Lake inflow is the same as the fresh water or low salinity seep into Caland, Seep 1. For Hogarth simulations lHlb, 1H2 and

1H3 the groundwater entrance height was varied from 100 m, 10 m, and 180 m, respectively. In addition, two variations of simulation lHlb (1H HSGW and 1H MSGW) were conducted with groundwater salinity values of 2.4 psu and 1.3 psu, respectively, which are higher than that used in lHlb (0.4 psu). These simulations were performed to examine if the salinity of groundwater has any influence on the limnology and stratification of Hogarth pit lake. 84 4.4.2 Scenario 2: Future Conditions When Pit Lakes Join

In this scenario, the water surface elevation in Caland has passed 385 masl in elevation and begins to flow into Hogarth. Consequently, Caland now loses water from an outlet as well as evaporation and Hogarth gets a new inflow source from Caland. With respect to the initial profile, it was assumed that the pit lake limnology has remained constant and the simulations for both pits are initialized with the same temperature and salinity profiles as in Scenario 1.

However, the depths of the measurements in the initial profile are adjusted to correspond to the new water surface elevations of 385 masl and 366.5 masl for Caland and Hogarth, respectively, based on rebound Model 2B. For Caland a withdrawal is added at the 385 m outlet. The determination of the volume of the withdrawal is described in section 4.2.6. Simulations for

Caland, 2C1 and 2C2, assess the effect of groundwater entrance height has on limnology.

Simulation 2Cv2 considered the influence of inflow from Fairweather Lake on Caland pit lake limnology. Simulation 2Cv3 used water elevations and volumes calculated for rebound model

IB, which has a slower rate of rebound than model 2B, in order to see the effects on the limnology of the pit lake. This simulation also included inflow from Fairweather Lake.

For Hogarth simulations, an inflow was added to account for water flow from Caland into

Hogarth upon joining of the pit lakes. The water elevation in Hogarth is below the 385 masl outlet from Caland. For simulations 2H1 and 2Hlb, temperature and salinity values of the inflow from Caland into Hogarth were an average of simulation 2C1 results at 2 m, 5 m, 10 m, 15 m and

20 m. The difference between 2H1 and 2Hlb was the groundwater entrance heights of 100 m and 180 m, respectively. To simulate the potential affect of water outflow from deeper in the

Caland water column, where salinity values were higher, variations of Model 2H1 were made;

Models 2H2 and 2H3 used temperature and salinity values averaged from 40 to 60 m and 100 to

140 m, respectively. As with Caland two alternate versions of this scenario were run for Hogarth

(2Hv2 and 2Hv3). In 2Hv2 the temperature and salinity values of the Caland inflow are taken 85 from simulation 2Cv2 and were the average of results for 2 m, 5 m, 10 m, 15 m and 20 m. This simulation was to assess if the addition of inflow from Fairweather Lake into Caland changes the resultant limnology of Hogarth when the pits join. For simulation 2Hv3, rebound Model lb was used to determine water elevations and inflow volumes, and includes inflow from Fairweather

Lake into Caland to assess if the slower rebound rate influences pit lake limnology.

4.4.3 Scenario 3: Future Conditions When Pit Lake Outflow to the West Arm

In this scenario, the two pit lakes have already joined and their water surface elevation has passed the elevation of the outlet to the West Arm (394 masl). With respect to the initial profile, both pits were initialized with the same temperature and salinity profiles as in Scenarios

1 and 2. However, the depths of the measurements in the initial profile were adjusted to correspond to the new water surface elevation of 394 masl. In this scenario Caland has one withdrawl from an outlet with an elevation of 385 masl and Hogarth now has one outlet at 394 masl. In the meteorological file, the height of the weather station above the lake bottom has been increased by 2 m in these simulations. This was done so that the water level in Caland pit lake does not rise above the weather station height which results in the termination of the simulation.

The change in the height of the weather stations was made instead of changing the physical morphometry of the lake. Only one simulation was conducted for each pit with and without an additional inflow into Caland. The simulations with an additional inflow simulated if water level was lowered behind Hardy Dam resulting in greater inflow into South East Arm and, subsequently, Caland and Hogarth pit lakes. Simulations 3C_lout and 3Hv2 were without the additional inflow and 3Cv31 out and 3Hv3 were with the additional inflow. Similar to previous simulations, including 2Hv2, the temperature and salinity values of the inflow from Caland simulations 3Hv2 and 3Hv3 were taken from results of simulations 3C I out and 3Cv3_lout, 86 respectively. All scenario 3 simulations included an inflow from Fairweather Lake because at this point in the rebound process the three lakes are joined.

4.5 Results

Temperature, salinity and density profiles for each simulation are illustrated in Figures

4.1 to 4.9. The illustrations output by Modeller v2b2 indicates a layer's height in the water column relative to the zero-height elevation (equals the bottom of the pit). In order to facilitate the interpretation and description of results, a depth scale was added to each illustration and all discussions of the position of layers within the water column was with respect to the depth scale.

The depth scale indicates the depth of layer in the water column relative to surface. All of the illustrations also include temperature (°C), salinity (psu) and density (kg/m ) scales. The temperature scale used in the illustrations is the same for both Hogarth and Caland results. In order to maintain detail in the salinity and density profile illustrations for Caland and Hogarth pit lakes, different scales are used for each pit. For each pit all simulations use the same scales with the following exceptions: 1H HSGW and 1H MSGW density scales are increased. The year

1991 appears on each diagram because the meteorologic data file requires the data to be after

1990. Thus, the dates in the meteorologic data file were arbitrarily set to the year 1991 although data is from 1986 for both pits.

4.5.1 Scenario 1

Caland: The temperature, salinity and density profiles of Caland simulations lClb, IClc,

ICld, and lCle are largely similar. A steep thermal gradient exists 10 m below the surface in all temperature profiles indicating the presence of a thermocline (Figs 4.1 and 4.2). The 10 m epilimnion1 remains warmer throughout the simulation, and thermally stratifies in the summer

1 A glossary of terms can be found in appendix VII. 87 and mixes in the fall. Below the thermocline is a layer of cold water (~ 4°C) approximately 15 m thick that exists throughout the simulation. The water column gradually warms from the cold layer down to a depth of 50 m, at which point the water column's temperature (~5.9°C) is relatively uniform down to the bottom. The difference between the temperature profiles of

Caland simulations is that simulation lClb and lCld have plumes at depths of 90 m and 60 m, respectively, and all other simulations do not (Figs. 4.1 and 4.2). This suggests that the groundwater entrance heights influence plume formation.

The salinity of the epilimnion (0.3 to 0.4 psu) was slightly lower than the cold layer below the thermocline (0.5 psu). The salinity increases to 0.7 psu from the bottom of the cold layer to a depth of 50 m. From 50 m to 150 m the salinity of water column varies between 0.7 psu and 0.8 psu. The highest salinity water, 0.8 psu occurs as a layer between 90 m and 110 m.

From a depth of 150 m to the bottom of the water column the salinity is 0.6 psu. The salinity change in the water column from 150 m to bottom in simulation lClb and 1CV2 is not significant (<0.01 psu). Changes in salinity for lClb and 1CV2 correspond to loss of thermal stratification, which occurs slightly earlier in 1CV2.

The density profiles vary in accordance to the temperature profile in the epilimnion. The density of the water column below the thermocline attains a maximum density of 1001 kg/m that was maintained to the bottom. In simulation lClb, the highest density layer begins at a depth of 110 m and in the other simulations the layer begins at 120 m. The top of the highest density layer corresponds to the bottom of the high salinity layer (90 to 110 m) indicating the presence of a chemocline at a depth of 110 m.

The temperature, salinity and density gradients indicate that Caland is meromictic with a mixolimnion from the surface to 35 m in the water column, a chemolimnion from 35 to 110 m, and a monimolimnion from 110 m to the bottom. The upper 30 m of the water column thermally stratifies with a epilimnion from the surface to 10 m, a metalimnion from 10 to 15 m and a 88 hypolimnion from 15 to 35 m. Meromictic stratification in Caland has been previous observed

(McNaughton, 2001; Vancook, 2005; Gould, 2008; Godwin, 2010). The mixolimnion predicted by DYRESM (35 m) is thicker than the measured thickness of the mixolimnion (20 m) reported by Godwin (2010). The addition of inflow to Caland from Fairweather Lake did not change the range in values or patterns for the temperature, salinity, and density profiles with the exception of slightly increasing the thickness of the mixolimnion (Fig. 4.1). The salinity profiles for Caland show a salinity inversion in the middle of the lake that may be an artifact of the initial profile used in this study. This artifact is likely a result of the in situ conductivity measurements used to calculate salinity, which increased down to the middle of the water column and then undergo a slight decrease to the bottom of the pit lake.

Hogarth: The temperature, salinity and density profiles for Hogarth simulations lHlb and 1H3 are very similar (Fig. 4.3). The profiles show that below a depth of 55 m to the bottom of the pit lake the temperature of the water column (~4.6°C) is uniform. From the start of the simulation until mid-August there is a layer 1 - 3 m that was generally 10°C warmer than the water below. Below the warm layer to a depth of 20 m the water column thermally stratifies. As the water column begins to cool in mid-August thermal stratification is lost, including the warm layer.

The thin warm water layer at the surface of Hogarth also has the lowest salinity (0.9 psu)

Immediately below this layer to a depth of 20 m is the highest salinity layer (2.2 psu). The bottom of the high salinity layer (20 m) corresponds to the maximum depth that thermal stratification extends to, and suggests the existence of a thermocline. When thermal stratification is lost in August, the top 20 m of the water column mix and the thin 1 to 3 m layer of warm, low salinity water disappears. During this period the water column gradually increases in salinity from the surface to a depth of about 20 m, which is in contrast to the sharp gradients at the beginning of the simulation. 89

996.0 997 0 9980 9990 1000.0 1001.0 998.0 997.0 998.0 999.0 1000.0 1001.0 Density Densfty

Figure 4.1: Temperature (°C), salinity (psu) and density (kg/m ) profiles for scenario 1 simulations lClb and 1CV2 for Caland pit lake. Aside from the salinity at bottom of the pit increasing earlier in 1CV2 than lClb there are no significant differences in profiles. 6.0 10.0 14.0 18.0 22.0 26.0 "eniae'ut.ic

0.30 0 40 0.50 0.60 0.70 0.80 SaMy

"i 1 r 996.0 ' 997.0 ' 998.0 ' 999.0 ' f000.0 ' TOOJ.O 9980 9970 9980 9990 1001.0 Oonsny Donslt»

Figure 4.2: Temperature (°C), salinity (psu) and density (kg/m ) profiles for scenario 1 simulations IClc and ICld for Caland pit lake. The profile for simulation lCle is identical to ICld and is not shown. Relative to lClb, IClc and ICld do not have a plume in the layer with the highest salinity and the salinity at the bottom of the pit does not change with time. 91 Below a depth of 20 m the water column consists of two layers: i) a higher salinity layer

(2.1 psu) from 20 to 110 m; and ii) a lower salinity layer (1.9 psu) that extends from 110 m to the bottom. In simulation lHlb, a plume is present in the low salinity layer but is absent in simulation 1H3, indicating the influence of the groundwater entrance height on plume formation.

The density of the upper 20 m of the water column varies in accordance with temperature. Below a depth of 20 m, density gradually increases, reaching a maximum (1002.1

-5 kg/m ) at a depth of 80 m, which is maintained to the bottom of the pit lake. Simulation 1H2, with the groundwater entrance height at 10 m, would terminate prematurely due to an error regarding buoyant inflow during initialization.

Simulation 1H_MSGW is largely similar to lHlb (Figs. 4.3 and 4.4). The maximum depth that thermal stratification extends to is 20 m. In the salinity profile, the 1 to 3 m thick low salinity layer (0.9 psu) at the surface overlies a layer with highest salinity (2.2 psu), which extends to a depth of 20 m. Below a depth of 20 m the water column consists of two layers: i) a higher salinity layer (2.1 psu) from 20 to 110 m; and i) a lower salinity layer (1.9 psu) that extends from 110 m to the bottom of the lake. Relative to simulation lHlb, the salinity in the bottom low salinity layer in 1HJVISGW is 0.02 psu higher. A plume is present in the high salinity layer of 1H_MSGW at depth of 60 m. The density gradually increases below a depth 20 m, reaching a maximum (1002.2 kg/m ) at a depth of 80 m, which is maintained to the bottom of the pit lake.

There are a number of differences between the salinity and density profiles of simulation

1H HSGW in comparison to 1HMSGW (Fig. 4.4). Below 20 m in simulation 1HHSGW, the water column can still be divided into two layers but they occur at different depths: the high salinity (2.1 psu) layer extends from 20 m to 80 m; and, the low salinity (1.9 psu) layer from 80 m to the bottom. Also, no plume is present in the high salinity layer. 92

-*T—t—i—r . . . 2.0 6.0 ' 10.0 ' 14.0 ' 18.0 ' 22.0 26.0 30.0 14.0 18.0 22.0 26,0 30.0 Temperature Temperature

~l "1 — i r i i i ^ | j j- t i ( 996.0 997.0 998.0 999.0 1000.0 1001.0 1002.0 996.0 9970 998.0 999.0 1000.0 1001.0 1002.0 DMIfy Density

Figure 4.3: Temperature (°C), salinity (psu) and density (kg/m3) profiles for scenario 1 simulations IHlb and 1H3 for Hogarth pit lake. The salinity profile for IHlb shows a plume and that of 1H3 does not. 93 1HHSGW . 1H MSGW

Figure 4.4: Temperature (°C), salinity (psu) and density (kg/m3) profiles for scenario 1 simulations IHMSGW and IH HSGW for Hogarth pit lake. Relative to IHlb the density at the bottom of the pit is greater in simulations IHMSGW and IHHSGW. Simulation IHMSGW shows a plume in the salinity profile and 11I I ISGW does not. 94 From the surface to 20 m depth the density profile varies according to temperature. Below 20 m the density gradually increases reaching a maximum (1002.4 kg/m3 ) at 180 m, which is* maintained to the bottom. This layer occurs lower in the water column and is denser then IHlb and 1HHSGW. The presence of this layer suggests that the colder and higher salinity (2.2 psu) groundwater plunges to the bottom of the pit.

Based on simulation IHlb, Hogarth can be classified as meromictic because of the presence of a thermocline at a depth of 20 m and the steep salinity gradient between the 1 to 3 m low salinity lens (0.5 psu) and the high salinity water (2.2 psu) below it. The steep chemical gradient dissipates when thermal stratification is lost in August; however, the salinity of the water column from the surface to 20 m remains lower than the water below (Fig. 4.3). The loss of the steep chemical gradient suggests that the meromictic conditions are temporary. This supports the observations by McNaughton (2001), Gould (2008) and Godwin (2010), that a thin fresh water lens exists, at least temporarily, at the surface of Hogarth pit lake. The thin 1 to 3 m fresh water lens predicted by DYRESM is similar to the thin 1 to 2 m fresh water lens reported by McNaughton (2001), Gould (2008) and Godwin (2010). A distinct chemocline is not present throughout the scenario 1 simulations for Hogarth as it is in Caland, where density and salinity changes occur at the same depth (110 m) (Fig. 4.1 & 4.3). In Hogarth the top of highest density layer does not correspond to the bottom of the highest salinity layer.

Based on simulations IHlb and Hogarth's classification as meromictic, the mixolimnion extends from the surface to 20 m, the chemolimnion from 20 m to 80 m, and the monimolimnion from 80 m to the bottom. Here the contact between the chemolimnion and monimolimnion is defined to be the depth at which the maximum density is reached (Fig. 4.3). 95 4.5.2 Scenario 2

Caland: In general, Caland temperature, salinity and density profiles do not change in scenario 2 relative to simulations lClb with the following exceptions: i) the mixolimnion is thinner (20 m thick); ii) the chemocline is located higher in the water column (at a depth of 120 m); iii) the monimolimnion is thicker and has a lower salinity (0.5 psu) (Fig. 4.5).

Relative to simulation 2C1, increasing the groundwater entrance height in simulation 2C2 slightly increased the thickness (<5 m) of the epilimnion in the temperature, salinity and density profiles (Fig. 4.5). This may be because less groundwater is lost to entrainment when the groundwater entrance height is higher in the water column since the groundwater travels up the water column a shorter distance. Relative to 2C1, the increased freshwater inflow into Caland from the addition of inflow from Fairweather Lake (simulation 2Cv2) produced a slightly thicker freshwater lens at the top of the water column (Fig. 4.6). The use of a longer rebound rate in simulation 2Cv3 did not significantly change the temperature, salinity and density profiles in

Caland compared to 2Cv2 (Fig. 4.6).

Hogarth: Relative to simulation IHlb, Hogarth scenario 2 simulations (2H1, 2Hlb, 2H2,

2H2, 2Hv2 and 2Hv3) are significantly different (Figs. 4.3, 4.7, 4.8 and 4.9). The main differences are that the surface low salinity layer (0.9 psu) that was 1 to 3 m deep in simulation

IHlb is a permanent feature of simulation 2H1 and is 10 m deep. Also, thermal stratification in

Hogarth does not penetrate as deeply into the water column in simulation 2H1 compared to

IHlb. The density profile varies according to temperature from the surface to a depth of 10 m.

Below 10 m, the water column density increases to a maximum of 1002.1 kg/m at a depth of 80 m, the same as in simulation IHlb. Based on these differences Hogarth can be considers a permanent meromix; however, the mixolimnion occurs from the surface to a depth of 10 m in scenario 2 simulations and is thinner than that in simulation IHlb (20 m). The chemolimnion in simulation 2H1 occurs from 10 m to 80 m and the monimolimnion from 80 m to the bottom. 96

—i—i—r~i—r~ 2.0 6.0 10.0 14,0 18,0 22.0 26.0 30.0 2.0 6.0 10.0 14.0 18,0 22.0 26.0 30,0 Temperature

? E ,20I -S- ICOgT 60 p. i ;oii i 80

2SO

—r*""i . "T— —i—r 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50 G 60 ' 0.70 0.80 0.20 0.30 0 40 0.50 0 60 0.70 0,80 Sal)rwy Salinity

"'I Is: 200 1

996.0 997.0 998.0 999.0 >000.0 1001.0 996.0 997.0 998.0 999 0 1000.0 1001,0 Oonsity Donsity

Figure 4.5: Temperature (°C), salinity (psu) and density (kg/m ) profiles for scenario 1 simulations 2C1 and 2C2 for Caland pit lake. Relative to simulation lClb, the salinity in the pit lake is lower in simulations 2C1 and 2C2 and the low salinity surface layers are thinner. 97

120X5

r Tii r 14,0 18 0 2.0 6.0 10.0 14.0 18.0 22.0 26.0 30.0 Tsmpetature Tamperatyre

0,30 0.40 0.50 0.60 0.70 0.80 Salinity

, • | | 9960 997.0 993.0 9990 1000.0 1001.0 9960 997 0 9980 9990 10000 10010 Density Density

2Hlb changed the position and thickness of a plume in the chemolimnion from between 20 and

80 m in 2H1 and between 30 and 35 in 2Hlb (Fig. 4.7). Again, simulations 2H1 and 2Hlb indicated that plume formation is affected by the groundwater entrance height. Altering the chemistry of the inflow from Caland pit to higher salinity values in simulations 2F12 and 2H3 representing water from lower levels in Caland does not change the temperature, salinity and density profiles in comparison to 2H1 (Figs. 4.7 and 4.8). Similarly, the change in Caland inflow chemistry as a result the additional fresh water inflow into Caland from Fairweather Lake

(simulation 2Hv2) does not change the temperature, salinity and density profiles in comparison to 2H1 (Figs. 4.7 and 4.9). This is likely because the salinity of Caland, including its highest salinity layer (0.8 psu), is significantly lower than the salinity of Hogarth (1.9 to 2.2 psu), with the exception of the low salinity surface layer (0.9 psu) from 0 to 10 m. The use of a slower rebound rate in simulation 2Hv3 did not produce any significant changes to the profiles relative to simulation 2H1 (Figs. 4.7 and 4.9).

4.5.3 Scenario 3

Caland: Temperature, salinity and density profiles in simulation 3C_lout and 3Cv3 1 out for Caland are not significantly different than simulation 2C1 except for: i) the maximum temperature of the surface waters and the length of time it is maintained progressively decreases from simulations 2C1 to 3C lout to 3Cv3 1 out; and, ii) the density profile parallels the temperature profile with the density in the surface layer progressively decreasing from simulations 2C1 to 3C_lout to 3Cv3_lout (Figs. 4.5 and 4.10). The top of the dense bottom layer still correlates to the depth of the chemocline. The addition of an inflow into Caland from the Auxiliary Rawn Reservoir did not significantly change profiles between simulations

3Cv3_lout and 3C_1 out, with and without the additional inflow, respectively (Fig. 4.10). 99 Hogarth: In this scenario the temperature, salinity and density profiles in simulations,

3Hv2 and 3Hv3 significantly change relative to 2H1 (Figs. 4.7 and 4.11). For these simulations the warm temperature layer near the surface extends to greater depths (-20 m as opposed to ~ 10 m in simulation 2H1). Thermal stratification in upper 20 m of the water column in simulations

3Hv2 and 3Hv3 varies more over the course of the simulations compared to 2H1 and IHlb.

In simulations 2H1 and IHlb an elevated surface water temperatures (~26°C) exists from July to

August while in simulations 3Hv2 and 3Hv3 high surface temperature only exists for brief periods in July (Figs. 4.3, 4.7 and 4.11). There is no significant difference between the temperature profiles for simulations 3Hv2 and 3Hv3 (Fig. 4.11). The salinity profiles are significantly different in 3Hv2 and 3Hv3 relative to 2H1 and IHlb (Figs. 4.3, 4.7 & 4.11). A low salinity layer exists at the surface at the start of the simulation, but is lost for the remainder of the simulation. The withdrawal from Hogarth at the outlet to the West Arm likely accounts for the loss of the low salinity layer at the surface of Hogarth in scenario 3 simulations compared to scenariosl and 2 simulations, which do not have a withdrawal. For the majority of the simulations the lowest salinity waters are at the bottom of the pit lake. The highest salinity waters are between 10 to 110m and is split by a low salinity plume, which results in a gradual increase in depth of the lower contact of the high salinity layer overtime. There are no significant differences in salinity profiles between simulations 3Hv2 and 3Hv3. The density profiles for simulations 3Hv2 and 3Hv3 closely follow the temperature profiles at the surface (<10 m) and

the top of the highest density layer is at the same depth as the bottom of the highest salinity layer.

Other than the variations due to temperature, there are no other significant differences in the

density profiles for simulations 3Hv2 and 3Hv3 in comparison to 2H1. 100 2Hlb

2.0 6.0 10.0 14.0 18.0 22.0 26.0 30.0 on an mn ia n ia n oon o&n inn Tems»mtute

Sailnly

120S

996.0 997.0 'J'Jti.O 9'J'J.O 1000.0 1001.0 1002.0 996.0 99?.0 j'JUO 'JUb.O 1000.0 1001.0 1002,0 Density Density

Figure 4.7: Temperature (°C), salinity (psu) and density (kg/m3) profiles for scenario 2 simulations 2H1 and 2Hlb for Hogarth pit lake. Relative to simulation IHlb the salinity profiles show a permanent fresh water layer at the surface. Simulation 2H1 has a plume in the salinity profile and simulation 2Hlb does not. 101 2H2 2H3 1° •40 |40 ISO 180 E®- ,.E$- £a. 1120 > 120 -S.Cs JS Q O30a_ 0)ftL 1160 160

1200 [200 1240 1240

Jun Jul Alt Jun Jul Aug Sep 1901 1991

_! . r M r-.. _ 2.0 6.0 10.0 14.0 18.0 22.0 26 0 30.0 2.0 6.0 10.0 ' 14.0 ' 18.0 ' 22.0 26.0 30.0 Tempofatuf# Temperature

120s-

_! 1 1 1 T ! 1— TT r 0.20 0.60 1.00 1.40 1.80 2.20 0.20 0.60 1.00 1.40 1.80 2.20 Salinity Sai my

; . T' i "i—i—~r . 1_—j- ~ | , p—_ 996.0 997.0 998.0 999.0 10000 1001.0 1002.0 9S6.0 997 0 998.0 999.0 1000 0 1001.0 1002.0 Density Density

2Hv2 2Hv3 1°

140 |40

•so s 180 f Ess E.S- I — 1120 a 1120 0, x0)8}_ o' & I'ffi* 1160 1160 •200 1200

240 •240

Jun Jul Au Jun Jul AU Sep 1901 1991

2.0 6.0 10.0 ' 14.0 ' 18.0 ' 22.0 .0 mo 10.0 ' 14.0 ' J8. 0 ^ 22,0 ' 2S.0 ' 30.0 Tomjiefatara Tempwtw®

0.20 0.60 7.00 1,40 7.00 2.20 0.20 0,60 1.00 1.40 1,80 2.20 Salinity Salinity

to l2°| €>8i 120 fr w 'ffl 160 X

.T 1 1 1 T.... 9960 997.0 998.0 T 999J0 ' T000 01" 1001.0 1002.0 996,0 997,0 998,0 999.0 1000,0 1001.0 1002.0 Qamtty Damty Figure 4.9: Temperature (°C), salinity (psu) and density (kg/m ) profiles for scenario 2 simulations 2Hv2 and 2FIv3 for Hogarth pit lake. Relative to simulation 2H1, there are no significant differences in profiles. 103

o.zo ojo om I', i ft80 a to o.bo 020 cu- . *• aro oso

2.0 6.0 10.0 14.0 18.0 22.0 26.0 30.0 10.0 140 18.0 22.0 26.0 30.0 Tempeutkm Temperature

996.0 997.0 998.0 999.0 1000.0 1001.0 1002.0 996.0 997.0 998.0 999.0 1000.0 7001.0 1002.0 Donsity Dwwtty

Figure 4.11: Temperature (°C), salinity (psu) and density (kg/m ) profiles for scenario 3 simulations 3Hv2 and 3Hv3 for Hogarth. Relative to simulation 2111, the permanent fresh water layers at the surface of the pit lake no longer exist in simulations 3Hv2 and 3Hv3. 105 4.6 Discussion

4.6.1 Study results

Caland has previously been described as a meromictic lake because it has a well-defined chemocline and as a hard water alkaline lake with high sulphate concentrations in the chemolimnion and monimolimnion relative to the fresh water lens (mixolimnion) that forms the upper 20 m of the water column (McNaughton, 2001; Vancook, 2005; Gould, 2008; Godwin,

2010). Hogarth was previously described as holomictic not meromictic because most parameters appeared homogenous with depth; however, Hogarth did show an evident meromix during a period of increased rainfall in 1999 (McNaughton, 2001). Later studies also observed the development of a 1 to 2 m fresh water or low salinity lens (freshwater; 10 to 20 mg/L S04 ") at the surface of Hogarth in the summer (Gould, 2008; Godwin, 2010). Hogarth water quality has gradually changed from acutely toxic to chronically toxic but still has a higher salinity than

Caland (McNaughton, 2001; Gould, 2008). The difference in the limnology of the two lakes has been attributed to a greater amount of freshwater inflows into Caland and higher amounts of sulphide minerals present in the strata mined in Hogarth pit (McNaughton, 2001, Conly et al.,

2005, 2007; MacDonald, 2005; Cockerton, 2007; Godwin, 2010).

Overall the DYRESM scenario 1 simulations appear to accurately portray the present day characteristics and the major differences between Caland and Hogarth pit lakes (Figs. 4.1 and

4.3). The presence and positions of distinct gradients in the temperature, salinity and density for scenario 1 simulations of Caland suggest that Caland pit lake is meromictic (Figs. 4.1 and 4.2).

The simulated mixolimnion in Caland (simulation lClb) is slightly thicker than the measured fresh water lens reported in previous studies (McNaughton, 2001; Gould, 2008; Godwin, 2010).

Relative to Hogarth, the Caland water column is simulated to have a lower salinity and is in agreement with observed conditions (Figs. 4.1 and 4.3). Scenario 1 salinity and density profiles for Hogarth indicate the presence of a temporary thin fresh water lens at the surface or a 106 meromix (Fig. 4.3 and 4.4). This layer exists from May to mid-August in the Hogarth simulations and then mixes with the underlying high-salinity layer in late August. The timing and depth of the mixing from the surface in the salinity profile corresponds to the loss of thermal stratification.

For scenarios 1 and 2, a number of simulations were done for both pit lakes that only varied the entrance height of groundwater inflows into the water column as the actual height of the groundwater inflow is unknown. The termination of simulation 1H2 is due to an error involving a buoyant inflow and suggests that the groundwater inflow into Hogarth must originate at or above 100 m in height from the bottom of the pit, because simulations IHlb and 1H3, with groundwater entrance heights of 100 m and 180 m, respectively, did not terminate prematurely.

The groundwater entrance height also influences the formation of plumes in a number of simulations. Although DYRSEM uses a 1-dimensional assumption, vertical movement of low density plumes have been successfully modeled in Island Copper pit lake and Brenda pit lake

(Hamblin et al., 1999; Fisher & Lawrence, 2000). Plumes are formed in Caland scenario 1 simulations lClb (100 m) and ICld (140 m) suggesting that entrance groundwater height at or above 100 m results in their formation. Changes in salinity of the bottom layer for lClb and

1CV2, which correspond to loss of thermal stratification suggest that mixing is occurring in the bottom layers and may be result of inflows plunging to the bottom. Also, lClb and 1CV2 both have the same ground water entrance height suggesting that the groundwater entrance height influences mixing in the bottom of Caland pit since the other simulations do not show this change. No plumes were formed in scenario 2 simulations for Caland suggesting that mixing resulting due to outflow from Caland into Hogarth increases mixing in the water column and inhibits plume formation. For the Hogarth simulations, plumes are formed in scenario 1 simulations IHlb (100 m), IH MSGW (100 m), and 1I I I ISGW (100 m) and in all scenario 2 simulations. The plumes in simulations 2H1, 2H2, 2H3, 2Hv2, 2Hv3 are similar in terms of 107 thickness and height in the salinity profile, but that of simulation of 2Hlb is thinner and located

higher in the water column (Figs. 4.6 and 4.7). The groundwater entrance height of all the simulations except 2Hlb is the same, suggesting that the differences between the plumes is

influenced more by the groundwater entrance height then the salinity of the inflows.

Based on results for all three scenarios, the limnology of Caland will vary much less over

time compared to Hogarth as rebound progresses. In Caland the temperature, salinity and density

gradients maintain the same relative positions in the water column, but are shifted to higher

levels in the water column relative to the bottom and the mixolimnion in Caland becomes

progressively thinner overtime (Figs. 4.1, 4.5 and 4.10). The shift of the gradients to shallower

depth reflects the increase in the water elevation from scenario 1 through 3. The thinning of the

layers can be explained by the increase in surface area with elevation that occurs in each pit that

coincides with an increase in pit volume with elevation. Relative to scenario 1, the salinity in the

layers above and below the chemocline is higher than in scenarios 2 and 3. This may be the

result of mixing caused by the withdrawal at 385 masl in scenarios 2 and 3. Thus suggesting the

overall salinity of Caland pit lake appears to undergo a minor decrease as rebound progresses to

completion. Also in Caland, the maximum temperature of the mixolimnion and length of time

the temperature is maintained decreases, due to the increases in outflow volume between the

three scenarios. The density profile in the surface layers of the mixolimnion (depths <10 m),

follow the changes in the temperature profile.

In Hogarth, the salinity and temperature profiles vary more among the scenarios than the

density profiles. In scenario 1 Hogarth has a temporary fresh water lens that mixes with the

underlying high salinity water as the water column begins to cool in the last two months of the

simulation (Fig. 4.3). In scenario 2, with the addition of relatively low salinity water from Caland

the fresh water lens is thicker and becomes a permanent feature of the simulation (Fig. 4.7).

Finally, in scenario 3, the fresh water lens only exists briefly in the spring (Fig. 4.11). In all three 108 scenarios, the density profile at the surface follows the temperature profile and in some simulations the salinity profile, where salinity influences the temperature profile. For example: the depth of thermal stratification in Hogarth seems to follow the salinity profiles, in scenario 2, when a significant fresh water lens exists, the depth of thermal stratification is limited to its depth. But in scenarios 1 and 3 when the salinity stratification is not present, thermal stratification extends deeper into the water column from the surface (Figs. 4.3, 4.7 and 4.11); in addition the density profile for model IHlb and 1H13 only shows a 1 to 3 m fresh water lens from the beginning of the simulation until mid-July, after which the density beneath this layer decreases and follows the pattern of the temperature profile (Fig. 4.3). However, the temperature profile shows that the water below the fresh water surface lens begins to warm in mid-June, which suggests that the salinity is the more important control on density at the start of the simulation (Figs. 4.7).

In general, the addition of inflow from Fairweather Lake into Caland pit lake, simulating if Fairweather Dam were to be breached, does not have a significant impact on the temperature, salinity and density profiles. The addition of inflow from Fairweather in scenario 2 only slightly increased the thickness of Caland's surface fresh water lens (Fig. 4.6). In scenario 2 for Hogarth, the salinity of the inflow from Caland was changed reflecting the different temperature and salinity profiles that occur before and after the addition of Fairweather inflow, and no significant change was seen in the resultant limnology (Fig. 4.8). Apart from the addition of Fairweather inflow to Caland, simulations were conducted that varied the Caland inflow salinity. The change in Caland inflow salinity did not significantly change the salinity (<0.01 psu) of the water column or to the limnology of Hogarth, probably because the Caland water column overall is lower in salinity than Hogarth (Fig. 4.8).

Scenario 3 simulations are designed to simulate what happens when Caland and Hogarth have joined forming one super pit lake with subsequent outflow into the West Arm of the former 109 Steep Rock Lake. Results of Caland scenario 3 simulations suggest that when the water elevation in Caland reaches 394 masl fresh water will outflow from the pit lake. This is probably because the fresh water lens in Caland has sufficient volume to replenish the water lost due to withdrawl

(Fig. 4.10). The thickness of the freshwater lens exceeds the height difference between the outlet elevation (385 masl) and the final surface water elevation of 394 masl. In scenario 3, the fresh water lens that appears throughout scenario 2 simulations for Hogarth is not maintained (Fig.

4.11). The salinity profile suggests that when the super pit lake outflows, any freshwater at the surface of the Hogarth water column will outflow in addition to high salinity waters (1.9 to 2 psu). However, this simulation is only run over a 158 day long period and assumes the conditions represented by the initial profile in scenario 1 represent those in scenario 3, but shifted to up in the water column (which may not be the case). In scenario 2 simulations for Hogarth, a fresh water lens in maintained due to inflow from Caland. The thickness of this fresh water layer may increase overtime from when the pit lakes join to when the joined pit lakes outflow. If the fresh water layer in Hogarth increases in thickness Hogarth may develop a similar profile to that of

Caland and have fresh water lens that is thick enough to maintain a constant freshwater outflow.

However, further modeling is required to examine the influence of the initial profile on simulation results. A simple manner in which the influence of the initial profile could be examined is by using results of scenario 2 to construct the initial profile for scenario 3.

Alternatively, a series of simulations could be run for the period between when the pits join and when they outflow. The results of each simulation could be input into the initial profile of the next simulation in order to if Hogarth's fresh water lens becomes thicker overtime with continued inflow from Caland.

A number of simulations in this study looked at the affects of the groundwater entrance height and groundwater and inflow chemistry. Overtime the groundwater entrance height will change as will the volume of water entering the pits (Castendyk and Eary, 1999). In this study 110 the change in groundwater volume over time is taken into account in the water balance models calculated for the pit lakes that are used as the basis of the inflow volumes in DYRESM.

Castendyk & Webster-Brown (2007) demonstrated that knowledge of the density of major water inputs is important because small changes in chemistry can mean the difference between meromictic and holomictic conditions. When two different sources of water have significant differences in chemistry, a meromictic pit lake is likely to be produced (Bohreret et al., 1998;

Fisher & Lawrence, 2000; Castendyk and Webster-Brown, 2007). Based on the prediction of meromictic conditions in Caland, the lake-filling conditions will be analogous to Martha Lake

(New Zealand), Lake Goitsche (Germany), and Summer Camp pit lake (Nevada; Castendyk and

Webster-Brown, 2007; Parshley and Bowell, 2003; Boehreret et al., 1998) All these pit lakes have major inflows with differences in water chemistry and temperature; specifically low salinity surface water and high salinity groundwater. Caland pit lake receives water from groundwater

(0.43 psu), mine-impacted surface runoff (0.5 psu), and surface runoff (0.18 psu). The conditions in Flogarth are opposite of the pit lakes above. In contrast Hogarth pit is being filled by groundwater that has a lower salinity than the overland runoff. However, the true nature of the groundwater flowing into Caland and Hogarth pit lakes is unknown because the groundwater sample used to define the groundwater inflow salinity was taken from a shallow well located in glacial till, and not bedrock, the likely source of groundwater. In scenario 1, the major inflows into Hogarth are groundwater with a salinity of 0.43 psu and mine-impacted overland runoff with a salinity of 1.3 psu. Simulations varying the salinity of the groundwater, 1H_MSGW (1.3 psu) and 1H_HSGW (2.4 psu), increased the salinity and density in the monimolimnion of Hogarth pit lake (Fig. 4.4).

In general, pit lakes flooded by surface and groundwater sources, such as Caland and

Hogarth, are more sensitive to changes in input water chemistry (Fisher & Lawrence 2000). The influence inflow salinity changes on the stratification of pit lakes are best observed in the Ill Hogarth simulations in this study. In scenario 2, an additional low salinity inflow originating from Caland is added to Hogarth. Three simulations were run, 2H1, 2H2 and 2H3 that varied the salinity of the inflow from 0.35 psu to 0.37 psu to 0.42 psu, respectively, representing water flowing from different depths in Caland (Figs. 4.7 and 4.8). Varying the salinity value of the water flowing into Hogarth from Caland did not significantly influence results, probably because all three salinity values tested are significantly lower than the other sources of water for Hogarth.

However, the addition of the low salinity inflow into Hogarth produces a thicker (5 m versus 1 to

3 m) low salinity surface layer (Figs. 4.3 and 4.7).

4.6.2 Implications for the Future Toxicity of Caland and Hogarth

In order to assess the future toxicity of the pit lakes, in particular waters outflowing to the

West Arm, the relationship between sulphate concentration and salinity was used based on all the pit lake water sampling data from 1998 to 2009 (Fig. 4.12). Four outlying points were excluded.

As expected, there was a strong linear correlation (r2 =0.93) between salinity* and dissolved sulphate (excluding the 4 outlying data points). Because of this relationship the salinity values in the DYRESM simulations can be used as proxies for future sulphate concentrations in the pit lakes, where:

2 [S04 "] = 1185.4 • [salinity] - 372.87 (Eqn. 4.2)

Where: [SO42"] = sulphate concentration (mg/L) [salinity] = salinity (psu)

As the primary contaminate in Caland and Hogarth is dissolved sulphate (McNaughton, 2001;

Gould, 2008; and Godwin, 2010) the future toxicity is assessed relative to various water quality guidelines. Caland and Hogarth pit waters are characterized as Ca-Mg-S042 " (Shankie,• 2011). 112 The Canadian Drinking Water Guidelines recommend that sulphate concentrations in drinking water should not exceed 500 mg/1 (Health Canada, 2010). This guideline is an aesthetic objective because sulphate concentrations can affect the taste of drinking water and concentrations above this limit increase the number of complaints about gastrointestinal problems in some individuals

(WHO, 2004; Health Canada, 2010). The EPA Secondary Maximum Contaminant Level

(SMCL) is at or below 250 mg/L (EPA, 2003). The SMCL is based on taste and is not a

Federally enforceable regulation but a guideline for U.S. The EPA's health based recommendation for sulphate concentrations is 500 mg/L due to the laxative affects of sulphate at concentrations above this recommended limit (EPA, 2003).

The current the sulphate concentrations in Caland range between 200 mg/L and 500 mg/L with seeps into Caland having concentrations ranging from 5 to 4000 mg/L (McNaughton, 2001;

Gould, 2008; Godwin, 2010; Shankie, 2011). The current sulphate concentrations in Hogarth range between 1200 mg/L and 1900 mg/L with seeps into Hogarth having concentrations from

1700 to 5000 mg/L (McNaughton, 2001; Gould, 2008; Godwin, 2010; Shankie, 2011). The sulphate concentrations in Caland are below the drinking water guideline of 500 mg/L but are above the EPA SMCL. However, Caland pit lake has historically supported a commercial fish farm and no toxicity has been attributed to Caland waters (McNaughton, 2001; Gould, 2008; and

Godwin, 2010). The sulphate concentrations in Hogarth pit lake exceed all the guidelines for sulphate concentrations in drinking water and freshwater aquatic environments. The source of the high sulphate concentrations in Caland and Hogarth pit lakes is the Pyritic member of the

Joliffe Ore zone and the difference in sulphate concentrations between the two lakes is attributed

to the greater proportion of the Pyritic member in Hogarth pit (Fig. 2.2; Conly and MacDonald

(2004); MacDonald (2005); Cockerton, 2007; and, Conly et al., 2008ab).

Measured salinity values in Caland and Hogarth pit lake water columns vary in a similar

manner to observed variations in the pit lakes (McNaughton, 2001; Gould, 2008; Godwin, 2008). 113 Measured salinity values are compared to DYRESM predictions in order to assess the accuracy of the DYRESM predictions (Figs. 4.13 and 4.14). Note that: i) measured salinity values for

Caland and Hogarth do not extend to the bottom; ii) the DYRESM salinity results are for the layers DYRESM divides the water column into; and, iii) the measured salinity values used in the initial profile are compared to DYRESM predictions from 7 days into the simulation. The

DYRESM profile for layers 1 to 40 closely match measured values from the surface down to a depth of 100 m (Fig. 4.13). Also, the DYRESM predictions from layer 40 to the bottom (layer

100) and the measured salinity values below 100 m both profiles indicate a decrease in salinity, but the rate of decrease in measured salinity is greater. DYRESM salinity results for Hogarth closely match measured values except for at the surface and bottom where measured salinity values are lower than predicted (Fig. 4.14).

6000

5000-

4000-

= 1185.4X - 372. R2 = 0.9304^ 3000-

2000

1000-

0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 Salinity (psu)

Figure 4.12: Plot of salinity versus sulphate for all water samples collected from Caland and Hogarth pits and seeps between 1998 and 2009. Caland pit lake samples are represented by squares, black for seeps and grey for lake samples. Hogarth pit lake samples are represent by triangles, black for seeps and grey for lake samples. The black line shows the linear relationship between sulphate and salinity and has a correlation coefficient of 0.9304. 114

The salinity profiles for Caland scenario 1 simulations indicate the sulphate concentrations in epilimnion (0 to 10 m depth) are < 100 mg/L (Fig. 4.1 & 4.12). From 10 m to

30 m in the water column (metalimnion and hypolimnion) the sulphate concentration is -220 mg/L. The highest salinity layer (0.8 psu) in Caland has a sulphate concentration of ~ 570 mg/L and the bottom layer, below a depth of 155 m is -350 mg/L. Scenario 2 and 3 simulations indicated similar sulphate concentrations except that the bottom layer has a lower sulphate concentration, ~ 220 mg/L (Figs. 4.5, 4.10 and 4.12). The Caland salinity profiles indicate that the surface fresh water lens will maintain sulphate concentrations below all the water quality standards. Below the freshwater lens the sulphate concentrations are higher, however, only the highest salinity layer exceeds the drinking water quality guidelines for sulphate. Layers above and below the highest salinity layer are close to or exceed the EPA SMCL. The sulphate concentrations indicated by the linear relationship between salinity and sulphate and the

DYRESM salinity profiles for all three simulations are in agreement with observed concentrations in Caland (McNaughton, 2001, Gould, 2008; Godwin, 2010; and Shankie, 2011).

Results suggest that the sulphate concentrations in the bottom of the Caland pit lake will decrease slightly overtime: however, the sulphate concentrations in the remaining portions of the water column do not appear to change across the three simulations.

The salinity of the entire Hogarth pit lake water column, including the low salinity layers at the surface, exceeds drinking water quality standards for sulphate (Figs. 4.3, 4.7, 4.11 and

4.12). The salinity profiles from all three scenarios indicate that the low salinity layers at the surface have sulphate concentrations from 570 mg/L to 1300 mg/L. The sulphate concentrations of the remaining portion of the water column range from 1500 mg/L to 2200 mg/L. Based on the scenario 3 simulations waters with sulphate concentrations between 1700 and 1900 mg/L will outflow from Hogarth, well above all water quality guidelines for sulphate. 115

Measured Salinity DYRESM Predicted Caland - Spring 2008 Salinity for Caland

Salinity (psu) Salinity (psu) 0.34 0.84 0.300 0.800 0

20 20

40 Spring

40 60 - Summer

> 50 Fall

80 60

100

80 120 90

140 100

Figure 4.13: Comparison of measured salinity for Caland (left) and DYRESM predicted salinity for Caland in the spring, summer and fall (right). Note that the measured salinity predictions do not extend to the bottom of the pit lake but the DYRESM predicted values do. Measured values are similar above 100 m depth compared to layer 40 in the DYRESM predicted values. At about layer 35 DYRESM predicts a salinity decrease from the spring to fall. Measured values are derived conductivity measurements from Godwin 2010. 116

Measured Salinity DYRESM Predicted Hogarth - Spring 2007 Hogarth Salinity

Salinity (psu) Salinity (psu) 0.3 1.3 2.3 1.000 2.000 3.000 0

60 Spring

Summei 80 -

— Fall a « Q 100

120

140

160 •

100

Figure 4.14: Comparison of measured salinity in Hogarth (left) and DYRESM predicted salinity for Hogarth in the spring summer and fall (right). Measured values indicate a lower salinity at the surface of the pit lake in comparison the DYRESM predicted values. DYRESM predicts higher surface salinities in the fall compared to the spring and summer profiles which are similar. Measured values were derived from conductivity measurements from Godwin (2010).

Based on the DYRESM simulations for both pits it is likely that the waters flowing out of the pit lakes will be toxic. This is in agreement with the conclusions of an empirical geochemical study by Godwin (2010) that chronically toxic effects in the pit lakes are likely and that downstream communities will be negatively impacted. The column experiments conducted by 117 Godwin (2010) indicate the sulphate concentrations of outflowing waters to the West Arm

ranging between 800 and 1400 mg/, which is below the sulphate concentrations predicted by

scenario 3 simulations of the Hogarth-Caland combined pit lake (1700 and 1900mg/L). Godwin

(2010) predicts that the joined super pit lake will likely overturn in the spring and fall because

there is little resistance to mixing resulting from density differences. Results of the scenario 2

and 3 simulations for Caland suggest that Caland will not overturn when the pit lakes join are

joined and outflow (Figs. 4.5, 4.6 and 4.10). Scenario 2 simulations for Hogarth indicate that a

more pronounced meromix forms when Caland waters begin to flow into Hogarth (Figs. 4.7, 4.8

and 4.9). However, the salinity profiles for scenario 3 simulations indicate that Hogarth's surface

layers will mix when the pit lakes outflow into the West Arm (Fig. 4.11). DYRESM results

suggest that the current that will run through the two pit lakes will remove the freshwater

bringing more saline water the surface of Hogarth.

4.6.3 Limitations of the study and future work

There are a number of assumptions and uncertainties inherent in DYRESM (Castendyk &

Eary, 1999). Often weather stations are located away from the site and it must be assumed that conditions at the pit lake surface are equal to those at a nearby weather stations. When this assumption is made, as in this study, the affects of sheltering and shading of the pit walls on wind and solar radiation is not taken into account (Castendyk & Eary, 1999). Also, it must be assumed that past meteorologic conditions accurately reflect future conditions, which may not be the case given temperature increases due to global warming. However, the use of short time scales for simulations would reduce the affect of climate changes on model results (Castendyk &

Eary, 1999). Assumptions must be made about the elevation, timing and chemistry of inflows prior to pit filling. Coupling hydrodynamic modeling to geochemical predictions can help improve the accuracy of models, specifically the chemistry of inflows. For example, the use of 118 batch experiments and column leaching experiments to better constrain the chemistry of drainage

produced by difference rock types surrounding the pit lakes and the affect of any remediation

strategies used to remediate sources of acid mine drainage waters (e.g., Cockerton, 2007;

Shankie, 2011; Greiner, in progress).

The accuracy of any model depends on the validity of model input values. The following

outlines the uncertainties and assumptions used in this study. Any uncertainty in the water

balance and rebound models outlined in section 3.9.3 will carry over to the DYRESM

simulations, because the water balance is used to calculate inflow volumes entering the pit lakes

and to determine the water elevation in Hogarth once Caland begins to overflow. However, the

DYRESM model of pit lake morphology is based on the raw data used to make the exponential

curves in the stage-volume relationships and not from the curves, thus eliminating the curves as a

source of error. Any changes to the pit lake depth, volume or surface area would warrant

remodeling the hydrodynamics of the pit lakes (Castendyk and Eary, 1999). For example, changes to the water level management strategy for the study area, as described in 2.4, would

require derivation of new hydrodynamic models to account for the variation in water flow into

Caland. The calculation of a Lake Number is typically used to determine if a lake can be

modeled using DYRESM (Imerito, 2007). The Lake Number of Caland and Hogarth has not

been calculated instead it was assumed that because the pit lakes have a high surface area to

depth ratio Caland and Hogarth satisfy the one-dimensional assumption. The results of scenario 1

simulations suggest the use of DYRESM to simulate conditions in Caland and Hogarth is appropriate since the simulations portray the key characteristics of the Caland and Hogarth pit

lake limnology (Figs. 4.1 and 4.3). A limitation involving the version of DYRESM used in this study is the fact that the water surface temperature cannot be below zero or that DYRESM cannot simulate conditions involving ice. This limited the length of the simulation because the 119 pit lakes freeze over during the winter and water temperatures at the surface are close to zero in the spring and fall. Therefore, simulations could not be run continuously for an entire year.

There are a number of data limitations with regard to other required parameters in the

DYRESM input files. All the DYRESM input files, except the withdrawls file and the parameters file, include at least one parameter that had to be estimate because a measured value was not available for Atikokan or the study area. Any uncertainty regarding the withdrawl files stems from the water balance model used to define the volume of water exiting the pit lakes. In the configuration file, the light extinction coefficient of the lakes was estimated based on comparisons to other lakes, where the light extinction coefficient was measured based on secchi disk measurements. The light extinction coefficient can be influenced by the precipitation of iron oxide in the water column (Castendyk and Eary, 1999). This is a potential issue at Steep Rock as iron oxides are transported in surface runoff, particularly after major rain events. Geochemical modeling could be used to indicate the amount of iron oxide likely to be produced and a sensitivity analysis on the light extinction coefficient can be complete to better constrain it influence on simulation results.

In the physical data and lake morphometry file, all streams are assumed to have the same streambed half angle. The slopes in Caland were arbitrarily defined because they were not measured in the field. As discussed earlier, there is no data on the height of the groundwater inflow into the water column so simulations were done that varied the entrance height to look at its influence on limnology. In addition, the initial profiles used to initialize all the simulations are the same but with the height of the in situ measurements changed. This may not be an accurate representation of future water column conditions. This may be a significant issue in modeling

Hogarth as the limnology varies significantly between the simulations performed in this study.

Simulations could be conducted that use a profile based on scenario 2 simulation results to see if the resultant limnology in Hogarth changes. Alternatively, a series of sequential simulations for 120 years between the time the pits join and outflow could be run using the previous year's results for the present year's initial profile.

Meteorological data used in the DYRSEM simulation was collected from a number of weather stations that are not located on the study site. In the meteorological data file, the global solar radiation data used to determine the short wave radiation is for Moosonee, Ontario, which is located approximately 840 km north east of Atikokan, Ontario. Also, the cloud cover data used to determine the amount of long wave radiation in DYRESM is from Thunder Bay, Ontario, located approximately 208 km east of Atikokan. In addition the weather data was collected in a different year than the in situ measurements used in the initial profile. This may affect results because the weather conditions for day one of the simulation may be accurately reflect the conditions during the periods when the initial profile parameter measurements were taken.

Having meteorological data that matches the time period of the in situ measurement may increase the accuracy of the model, particularly if sub-daily data were to be used. The addition of the long wave and short wave radiation data to weather monitoring in Atikokan would increase the accuracy of future models simulations.

For inflow file, the amount of inflow from sources with different salinities was arbitrarily assumed based on available data and the fact that Caland gets more freshwater inflow than

Hogarth. Although there is data on seep chemistry, the volume of water discharged from the seeps and variations in flow rates overtime is poorly constrained. Many of the seeps at the Steep

Rock site are intermittent, only flowing after major rain events. Changes in the flow of water into the pit lakes was not investigated in this study but changes in volumes due to major rain events could impact the hydrodynamics. This may be of particular concern in Hogarth whose water column showed the most variation throughout this studies simulations. Another concern regarding surface water on the site is the stockpiles of pyritic material along the former Steep

Rock Lake shoreline. As Caland and Hogarth water level approach the original shoreline there 121 will be an increase in pit water interaction with pyritic waste rock. Geochemical models could be used to better constrain the effect of this material being flooded on water quality, which can then be input into DYRESM to examine the potential effects on limnology.

Previous studies have recommended extensive studies be undertaken to understand the chemical and physical properties of pit lake-filling waters, the timing and locations of inputs and on site meteorological monitoring (Castendyk and Eary, 1999; Castendyk and Webster-Brown,

2007; Hamblin, et al., 2009). Overall, an extensive field-monitoring program designed to fill in the information gaps described above would increase the accuracy of the DYRESM simulations.

Some key areas of research that would increase the accuracy of DYRESM models of Caland and

Hogarth include:

• A groundwater study to better constrain where the groundwater enters the pit

lakes, the approximately flow rate and its chemistry;

• An effort can be made to constrain the volume of inflows entering the pit lakes

from surface seeps and the fluctuations in seep chemistry;

• A limnology study to measure the light extinction coefficient in Caland and

Hogarth and chemical species that influence turbidity, for example, iron and

manganese;

• An onsite weather station would provide more accurate measurements of the

meteorological conditions that occur at the study. Accuracy could further be

improved by a weather station located on the pit lake surface. Measurement from

a weather stations located on the pit lake surface would taken into account

sheltering and shading affects on wind speed and solar radiation at the surface of

the pit lake;

• Global solar radiation and cloud cover or long-wave radiation could be added to

the meteorological data collection for Atikokan; and 122 • Further DYRESM simulations could be run and compared with years with in situ

conductivity measurements using the Hydrolab Surveyor 4 (Gould, 2008;

Godwin, 2010). These comparisons would help calibrate and validate the model

and to predict limnological predictions between sampling events (Castendyk and

Eary, 1999).

In addition, the full capabilities of the DYRESM could be used including the use of sub- daily measurements or by coupling DYRESM Computational Aquatic Ecosystem Dynamic

Model (CAEDYM). The use of sub-daily measurements may be useful to understand the influence of short-term events that may affect limnology such as extreme rainfall events or the initial effects of an addition of a new inflow source. Coupling DYRESM to CAEDYM would permit the simulation of more parameters (Hipsey et al., 2006a,b). Parameters of interest for

Caland and Hogarth pit lakes that can be modeled by CAEDYM include dissolved oxygen, iron and manganese. The amount of dissolved oxygen in Caland is lower than that in Hogarth. This has been attributed to the decomposition of waste produced by the fish farm that used to operate at Caland (McNaughton, 2001; Gould, 2008; Godwin, 2010). CAEDYM could be used to investigate how dissolved oxygen trends in Caland will change overtime after the cessation of fish farming. Understanding the distribution of dissolved oxygen in Caland and Hogarth will help in understanding the redox conditions within the pit lakes and subsequently whether submerged pyritic material or wall-rock in the pit lakes exposed to oxidizing conditions.

CAEDYM could also be used to investigate the speciation and concentrations of iron and manganese in the pit lakes. Iron and manganese are present in high concentrations in the ore zone and wall-rock as described in section 2.2. Iron and manganese are typically in particulate, colloidal or organic complexes in neutral or alkaline surface waters (Wetzel, 2000). The presence of particulate material increases the turbidity of the water column and will affect the light extinction coefficient (Castendyk and Eary, 1999). The light extinction coefficient is an 123 important parameter in the determination of heat fluxes in the DYRESM (Imerito, 2007).

CAEDYM simulations would required a field program that would include measurement of a number of parameters that have not been analyzed in the pit lakes previously (McNaughton,

2001; Imerito, 2007; Gould, 2008; Godwin, 2010). Another future study could also assess if inducing meromictic conditions in Hogarth would be beneficial.

There are a limited number of publications providing predictions of pit lake limnology

(Castendyk and Eary, 1999). Any study providing predictions on pit lake limnology and the influence on different parameters on model results will help close the knowledge gap in this area of pit lake research. The hydrodynamics of pit lakes influences the distribution of chemical species in the water column (Wetzel, 2000). Also, small changes to the salinity, density and temperature of inputs can produce significant changes to pit lake stratification (Castendyk and

Webster-Brown, 1999; Castendyk and Eary, 1999). Therefore, further hydrodynamics studies should be completed if there are any changes to the volume or chemistry of inflows, the pit morphology, or the current water level management strategy (see section 2.4). Also, this study did not consider the influence of Errington pit lake in its calculation of final pit volumes, nor did it considered current limnological conditions in Errington. The addition of Errington to the hydrodynamic model of Caland and Hogarth would add complexity to the current flow through system conceptualized in this study and may warrant a more detailed two or three-dimensional model of the future Steep Rock super pit lake.

4.7 Conclusions

The Dynamic Reservoir Simulations Model (DYRESM) simulations of current conditions (scenario 1) did accurately portray the key observed characteristics of and the differences between the Caland and Hogarth pit lake limnology. These key characteristics include that Caland is meromictic and has a lower overall salinity relative to Hogarth. Also, 124 Hogarth simulations showed the development of a temporary meromix, as has been observed previously (McNaughton, 2001; Gould, 2008; and Godwin, 2010. Simulations of when the two pits join (scenario 2), indicate that Caland will maintain its meromictic stratification but that the upper freshwater lens becomes thinner and, that Hogarth will develop a freshwater lens thick enough to remain stable during the loss of thermal stratification in response to seasonal overturn.

The salinity differences between the two pit lakes is great enough that water from any depth in

Caland will increase the thickness of the upper low salinity layer in Hogarth (Fig. 4.10). Scenario

3 simulations indicate the Caland will still maintain its upper freshwater lens and that the fresh water lens in Hogarth will not be maintained over the course of the simulation. The use of a difference rebound model did not result in any significant changes to the limnology of either pit lake. In Hogarth, the salinity of the inflow from Caland and the salinity of groundwater did not significantly affect the pit lakes stratification. These results suggest that the fresh water lens in

Caland is currently thick enough and that the pit lake receives enough fresh water inflow that the outflow from Caland will probably be low in salinity. Outflow from Hogarth will include any fresh water inflow it receives and will likely be mixed with some high salinity water. Further modeling is required better constrain the future salinity of the outflow water from Caland and

Hogarth pit lakes.

In general variations of the simulated scenarios did not significantly change the overall limnology of either pit lake. The entrance height of the submerged groundwater inflow influenced the development of plumes in both pit lakes. The addition of inflow from Fairweather

Lake into Caland only slightly increased the thickness of the freshwater lens in Caland in scenario 1 and lowered the changes the depth of the high salinity layers in scenario 2.

There is a linear relationship between sulphate concentrations and salinity values for water samples from the Caland and Hogarth pit lake water and seep samples. This trend allowed the DYRESM salinity profile results to be used as proxies for sulphate concentrations. Based on 125 the DYRESM scenario 3 results and the linear relationship between salinity and sulphate concentrations, it appears that water exiting Caland will have sulphate concentrations up to 100 mg/L. On the other hand, water entering the West Arm from the combined Hogarth-Caland pit lake will have sulphate concentrations ranging from 1700 mg/L to 1900 mg/L. In general, the sulphate concentrations in Caland are below water quality standards, while future Hogarth waters exceed all water quality standards.

Based on the results of these preliminary DYRESM simulations it is possible to conclude that DYRESM can be used to simulate the future hydrodynamics of Caland and Hogarth pit lakes. Future efforts should address some of the areas of uncertainty. Any study that aims to decrease the uncertainty surrounding one or more parameters or assumptions described in section

4.5.3 will increase the accuracy of the DYRESM simulations. Studies that better constrain the light extinction coefficient, groundwater volumes and chemistry, on site meteorologic data and surface seep volumes and chemistry should be the primary focus if an extensive field monitoring program is the be undertaken. 126

Chapter 5: General Conclusions

Rebound model 2B provides the best estimate for rebound at Caland and Hogarth pit lakes, and yields results that are comparable to measured water levels and the Regional Engineering model (MNR, 1986) Model 2B predicts that Caland will flow into Hogarth in 2070 and that the new Steep Rock Pit Lake will outflow into the West Arm in 2087. Differences in water balance parameters (i.e., precipitation, evaporation, groundwater inflow and runoff) cannot account for the 18-year difference in the predicted rebound rate between Model 2B and the Regional

Engineering model. The difference between Model 2B predictions and the Regional Engineering model predictions can be attributed to the manner in which the pit volumes are calculated.

In this study, the relationships among accumulated volume, surface area and elevation, are modeled by fitting exponential curves to measured data as described in section 3.3. The Regional

Engineering model defines the pit volumes using linear interpolation at a 1 m scale between contour elevations. In this study, the stage-volume relationships for Hogarth pit lake are more accurate than for Caland. This is likely because the shape of Caland pit lake is more irregular than that of Hogarth. Hogarth is a long, narrow lake of relatively consistent width. In contrast,

Caland pit lake has a complex shape, that includes islands and has pit walls that are more varied in slope. The surface area calculations for Caland include the portion of the land that will be flooded in between Caland and Hogarth pits once the water level in Caland reaches 385 m. This along with changes in slope likely account for the variation seen between actual pit volumes and the hypsographic curve used in this study. These results suggest that in future work, at minimum, linear interpolation should be used to define the volume in Caland pit lake due to its complex shape.

The Dynamic Reservoir Simulations Model (DYRESM) simulations for current conditions

(scenario 1) did accurately portray the key observed characteristics of and the differences in 127 limnology between the Caland and Hogarth pit lakes. These characteristics include that Caland is meromictic and has a lower overall salinity relative to Hogarth, and that Hogarth begins to show the development of a meromix. Simulations of when the two pits join (scenario 2) indicate that

Caland will maintain its stratification but that the upper freshwater lens becomes thinner and, that Hogarth will develop a freshwater lens thick enough to remain stable during the loss of thermal stratification. Simulation of when the pit lakes outflow into the West Arm (Scenario 3) indicate that Caland will maintain its upper freshwater lens but that a fresh water lens in Hogarth is briefly present at the start of the simulations. These results suggest that the fresh water lens in

Caland is currently thick enough and that the pit lake receives enough fresh water inflow that the outflow from Caland will probably be low in salinity. On the other hand, outflow from Hogarth-

Caland combined pit lake will probably have a high salinity. In general variations of the simulated scenarios, including altering the groundwater entrance height, inflow chemistry and the use of a longer rebound rate in the water balance calculations, did not significantly change the overall limnology of either pit lake.

The correlation between sulphate concentration and salinity for Caland and Hogarth waters enables the use of the DYRESM salinity profile results as proxies for sulphate concentrations. Consequently, water leaving Caland will have sulphate concentrations of <100 mg/L, and water leaving Hogarth-Caland combined pit lake will have sulphate concentrations ranging from 1700 mg/L to 1900 mg/L. In general, the sulphate concentrations in Caland are below the Canadian Water Quality Guidelines (500 mg/L) and EPA SMCL (250 mg/L) water but exceed the British Columbia Ambient Water Quality Guidelines (50 mg/L and 100 mg/L) while those in Hogarth waters will exceed all the water quality standards. Consequently, the outflow from the combined Hogarth-Caland pit lake will be toxic.

Based on the results of this study, DYRESM can be used to simulate the future hydrodynamics of Caland and Hogarth pit lakes. However, future research should include a field 128 monitoring program to address some of the areas of uncertainty including, the chemistry and entry height of groundwater in each pit, measurement of the light extinction coefficient, on site meteorologic data including measurements for solar radiation and surface seep volumes and chemistry. Furthermore, future hydrodynamic studies should include more comparisons to observed conditions in order to better calibrate and validate the models. Any of the aforementioned studies to decrease uncertainty in the DYRESM simulations will not only create more accurate models of Caland and Hogarth but will also help validate the use DYRESM in the prediction of limnology conditions in pit lakes. 129

References

Balistrieri, L.S., Temple, R.N., Stillings, L., Shevenell, L.A., 2006. Predicting spatial and temporal variations in temperature, salinity, and conservative elements during stratification and overturn in Dexter pit lake, Tuscarora, Nevada, USA. Interactive Pit Lakes 2004 Conference. United States Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C. EPA/625/C-06/002, 1184 - 1203 p.

Bear, J. 1979. Hydraulics of Groundwater. New York: Dover Publications Inc. 436 - 462 p.

Bohreret, B., Heidenreich, H., Schimmele, M., and Schultze, M. 1998. International Journal of Salt Lake Research v. 7, 235-260.

Bowell, R.J., Barta, J., Mansanares, W. and Parshley, J. 1998. Geological controls on pit lake chemistry: Implications for the assessment of water quality in inactive open pits. In: Proceedings of the International Mine Water Association Symposium on "Mine Water and Environmental Impacts", Johannesburg, South Africa, 7-13th September 2008. (Volume II) v. 2, 375-386.

Capper, P.S. 1978. Environmental Plan for Steep Rock Iron Mines Limited. Atikokan, Ont. 113 P-

Card, K.D. and Ciesielski, A. 1986. DNAG 1: Subdivisions of the Superior Province of the Canadian Shield; Geoscience Canada v. 13, 5 - 13.

Castendyk, D.N. and Eary, L.D. (Eds) 2009. Mine pit lakes: characteristics, predictive modeling, and sustainability vol. 3. Society for Mining, Metallurgy, and Exploration, Inc. Littleton, Colorado, USA. 33-44, 61-75, 91-98, 101-114 p.

Castendyk, D.N. and Webster-Brown, J.G. 2007. Sensitivity analysis in pit lake prediction, Martha Mine, New Zealand 1: Relationship between turnover and input water density. Chemical Geology, v. 244, 42-55.

Center for Water Research (CWR). 2002. Dynamic reservoir simulation model DYRESM: user manual. Report WP 1573 JA. Centre for Water Research, Univeristy of Western Australia, Perth, Australia 38 p.

Cockerton, S., 2007. An experimental water-rock interaction study into the origins of the chemical characteristics, of the Hogarth and Caland pit lakes, Steep Rock Lake, Atikokan. Unpublished H.SBc. thesis, Lakehead University, Thunder Bay, ON, Canada 48 p.

Conly, A., and MacDonald, J. 2005. Origin of high-sulphate waters of Hogarth Pit Lakes, Steep Rock Iron Mine, Atikokan, Ontario. 51st Annual Institute on Lake Superior Geology Proceedings and Abstracts, p. 12 - 13. 130 Conly, A., Cockerton, S., and Lee, P. 2007. An experimental water-rock interaction study into the origin of high-sulphate waters associated with the Steep Rock Iron Mines, Atikokan, Ontario. 53d Annual Institute on Lake Superior Geology Proceedings and Abstracts. 22 - 23 p.

Conly, A. G., Lee, P. F., Godwin, A., Cockerton, S. 2008. Experimental Constraints for the Source of Sulfate Toxicity and Predictive Water Quality for the Hogarth and Caland Pit Lakes, Steep Rock Iron Mine, Northwestern Ontario, Canada. - In: Rapantova, N. & Hrkal, Z.: Mine Water and the Environment. - Paper #139; Ostrava (VSB - Technical University of Ostrava). (http://www.imwa.info/docs/imwa_2008/IMWA2008 _139_ Conly.pdf Accessed December 8, 2011)

Conly, A. G., Lee, P. F., Goold, A., Godwin, A. 2008. Geochemistry and Stable Isotope Composition of Hogarth and Caland Pit Lakes, Steep Rock Iron Mine, Northwestern Ontario, Canada. - In: Rapantova, N. & Hrkal, Z.: Mine Water and the Environment. - Paper #133; Ostrava (VSB - Technical University of Ostrava), (http://www.imwa. info/docs/imwa_2008/IMWA2008_l33_Conly.pdf Accessed December 8, 2011)

Conly, Andrew George; Shankie, Simon; Lee, Peter 2010. Treatment of sulphate toxic waters using permeable reactive barriers: batch and flow-through reactor experiments. - In: Wolkersdorfer, Ch. & Freund, A.: Mine Water & Innovative Thinking. Sydney, Nova Scotia (CBU Press). 221 - 225 p.

Cornwell, A.R., and Harvey, L.D. 2007. Soil moisture: a residual problem underlying AGCMs. Climatic Change, v. 84, 313-336.

Eary, L.E. 1999. Geochemical and equilibrium trends in mine pit lakes. Applied Geochemistry v. 14, 963-987.

Fisher, T.S.R., 2002. Limnology of the meromictic Island Copper Mine Pit Lake, PhD thesis, University of British Columbia, Canada, 228 p.

Eaton, A.D., Clesceri, L.S., Rice, E.W., and Greenberg, A.E. (Eds) 2005. Standard methods for the examination of water and waste water 21st Edition. American Public Health Association. 1368 p..

Environment and Land HQ Division, 2000. Water quality: ambient water quality guidelines for sulphate, overview report. Prepared pursuant to Section 2(e) of the Environmental Management Act. 1981. (http://www.env.gov.bc.ca/wat/wq/BCguidelines/sulphate/ sulphate.html#summary; accessed December 8, 2011)

EPA, 2003. Drinking Water Advisory: Consumer Acceptability Advice and Health Effects Analysis on Sulfate. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Water (4304T) Health and Ecological Criteria Division, Washington, D.C. EPA 822-R-03-007, 29 p.

Fisher, T.S.R., and Lawrence, G.A. 2000. Observations at the upper halocline of the Island Copper pit lake. In: Lawrence, G.A., Pieters, R., Yonemistsu, N. (Eds) Proceedings of the 5th International Symposium on Stratified Flows, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada 413 -418 p. 131 Godwin, A. 2010. Geochemical and toxicological investigations of the Hogarth and Caland pit lakes, Steep Rock iron mine site. Unpublished MSc. thesis, Lakehead University, Thunder Bay, ON, Canada 122 p.

Godwin, Amy Lynn, Lee, Peter Ferguson, Conly, Andrew George, Goold, Andrea R. (2010): Predicting toxicity of future combined pit lakes at the former Steeprock Iron Mine near Atikokan, Ontario. - In: Wolkersdorfer, Ch. & Freund, A.: Mine Water & Innovative Thinking. - p. 343 - 347; Sydney, Nova Scotia (CBU Press). 343 - 347 p.

Gould, A.R. 2008. Water quality and toxicity investigations of two pit lakes at the former Steep Rock iron mines, near Atikokan, Ontario. Unpublished MSc thesis, Lakehead University, Thunder Bay, ON, Canada, 122 p.

Hamblin, P.F., Stevens, C.L., Lawrence, G.A., 1999. Simulation of vertical transport in mining pit lake. Journal of Hydraulic Engineering v. 125, 1029-1038.

Heinselmen, M. 1996. The Boundary Waters Wilderness Ecosystem. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. 334 p.

Health Canada, 2010. Guidelines for Canadian drinking water quality: summary table. Federal- Provincial-Territorial Committee on Drinking Water, 15 p.

Hipsey, M.R., Romero, J.R., Antenucci, J.P., and Hamilton, D. 2006a. Computation Aquatic Ecosystem Models: CAEDYM v2, v2.3 Science Manual. Contract Research Group, Centre for Water Research, University of Western Australia. 90 p.

Hipsey, M.R., Romero, J.R., Antenucci, J.P., and Hamilton, D. 2006b. Computation Aquatic Ecosystem Models: CAEDYM v2, v2.3 User Manual. Centre for Water Research, University of Western Australia. WP 1387.1 MH. 58 p.

Imberger, J. and Patterson, J.C. 1981. A Dynamic Reservoir Simulation Model - DYRESM: 5. In: Proceedings of the Symposium on predictive ability of transport models for inland and coastal waters. Academic Press Inc. 310 - 361 p.

Imerito, A.J. 2001. The CWR dynamic reservoir simulation model DYRESM: Science manual: Report WP 1573 JA. Centre for Water Research, Univeristy of Western Australia, Perth, Australia 38 p.

Ivey, G.N., Oldham, C.E., Huber, A., Wake, G., 2006. Hydrodynamic processes in a Western Australian coal mine pit lake. Interactive Pit Lakes 2004 Conference. United States Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C., EPA/625/c-06/002.

Jackson, B. 2007. Area, Volumes and Water Fill Calculations for Steep Rock Mine Area. Unpublished manuscript. Ministry of Natural Resources.

Jolliffe, A.W. 1955. Geology and Iron Ores of Steep Rock Lake. Economic Geology, v. 50, 373- 398 p. 132 Kusky, T.M., and Hudleston, P.J. 1999. Growth and demise of an Archean carbonate plateform, Steep Rock Lake, Ontario, Canada. Canadian Journal of Earth Science, v. 36, 565-584.

Lee, P. F.; Cook, M. V.; Conly, A. G. (2008): Predicting Discharge Water Quality from Steeprock Pit Lakes in Atikokan, Ontario, Canada. - In: Rapantova, N. & Hrkal, Z.: Mine Water and the Environment. - Paper #137; Ostrava (VSB - Technical University of Ostrava). (http://www.imwa.info/docs/imwa_2008/IMWA2008_l 37_Lee.pdf, accessed December 9, 2011).

MacDonald, J.C. 2005. An Integrated Mineralogy, Geochemistry, and Stable Isotope Geochemistry Investigation into Potential Sulphate Sources of the Hogarth Pit Lake, Steep Rock Iron Mine, Atikokan. HB.Sc. Thesis, Lakehead University Department of Geology, Thunder Bay, ON., 73 p.

McNaughton, K.A. 2001. The limnology of two proximate pit lakes after twenty years of flooding. Unpublished MSc. thesis, Lakehead University, Thunder Bay, ON, Canada, p. 85.

MNR (Ministry of Natural Resources). 1986. Report on the Surrender of Mining Claims By Steep Rock Resources Inc., Steep Rock Lake Atikokan District., Ontario. 146 p.

Parshley, J.V., and Bowell, R.J., 2003. The limnology of Summer Camp Pit Lake: a case study. Mine Water and the Environment v. 22, 170-186.

Penman, H.L. 1948. Natural evaporation from open water, bare soil and grass. Proceedings of the Royal Societey of London. A193, 120-145.

Perusse, C.B., 2009. Hydrogeological and geochemical assessment of two tailings impounds at the former Steep Rock Iron Mine, Atikokan, Ontario. Unpublished HBSc thesis, Lakehead University, Thunder Bay, ON, 39 p.

Shankie, S.J. 2011. Assessment of Permeable Reactive Barriers for Sulphate Reduction at the Former Steep Rock Iron Mine Site, Atikokan, Ontario. MSc thesis, Lakehead University Department of Geology, Thunder Bay, ON, Canada 151 p.

Shevenell, L. 2000a. Analytical method for predicting filling rates of mining pit lakes: example from the Gretchell Mine, Nevada. Mining Engineering, v. 52, p. 53 - 60.

Shevenell, L.A. 2000b. Water quality in pit lakes in disseminated gold deposits compared to two natural, terminal lakes in Nevada. Environmental Geolology, v. 39, 807 - 815.

Shklanka, R. 1972. Geology of the Steep Rock Lake Area District of Rainy River. Ontario, Department, Mines and Northern Affairs. Geolology. Report. 93.

Steep Rock Mines. 1943. The Steep Rock Iron Ore Deposits. A Story of Patient Investigation and Development. Can. Min. J. v. 63, 437-444. 133 Sowa, V.P., Adamson, R.B., and Chow, A.W. 2001, Water Management of the Steep Rock Iron Mines At Atikokan, Ontario During Construction, Operations, and After Mine Abandonment. - IN: Proceedings of the 25th Annual British Columbia Mine Reclamation Symposium in Campbell River, BC, 2001. The Technical and Research Committee on Reclamation. 104 - 115 p.

Stinton, P., Moreno, J., Bartlett, D., and Williamson, A. 2002. A method for simulating pit lake development and passive containment resulting from complex geometry pit lakes. Agenda of the Hardrock mining 2002: issues shaping the industry. Westminister, Colorado. 25 p.

Stone, D., Kamineni, D.C., and Jackson, M.C. 1992. Precambrian geology of the Atikokan area, northwestern Ontario. Geological Survey of Canada. Bulletin 405,106 p.

Stone, D., Tomlinson, K., Bernatchez, R., and Fralick, P., 2000. Geology of the Archean Steep Rock Lake - Finlayson Lake Greenstone Belt. Forty-sixth Annual Meeting, Insitute on Lake Superior Geology, Thunder Bay, ON. v.46(2), 179-214.

Stott, G., Corkery, T., Leclair, A., Boily, M., and Percival, J.A., 2007, A revised terrane map for the Superior Province as interpreted from aeromagnetic data: in Institute on Lake Superior Geology Proceedings, 53rd Annual Meeting, Lutsen, Minnestota, Abstract, v.53, part 1, p. 74-75.

Surrano, S.E. 1997. Hydrology for engineers, geologists and environmental professionals: an integrated treatment of surface, subsurface and contaminant hydrology. Hydroscience Inc. Lexington, Ky. 466 p.

Taylor, B. 1978. Steep Rock The Men and the Mines. Quetico Publishing: Atikokan Ontario.

Thornthwaite, C.W. 1948. An approach toward a rational classification of climate. Geography. Rev. v. 38, 55-89.

Timmis, B.B., 2011. An investigation of acid rock drainage interaction with waste rock materials and catchment ponds at Steep Rock Mine Site, Atikokan, ON. Unpublished HBSc thesis, Lakehead University, Thunder Bay, ON, 62 p.

UNESCO, 1981. Background papers and supporting data on the Practical Salinity Scale 1978. Unesco technical papers in marine science 37. United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, Place de Fontenoy, 75700, Paris.

Vancook, M. 2005. The limnology and remediation of two proximal pit lakes in northwestern Ontario. Unpublished MSc thesis, Lakehead University, Thunder Bay, ON, Canada, 105 P-

Wetzel, R.G. 2001. Limnology: Lake and River Ecosystems Third Edition. San Deigo: Elsevier Academic Press. 1006 p. 134 Wilks, M.E. and Nisbet, E.G. 1988. Stratigraphy of the Steep Rock Group, northwestern Ontario: a major Archean unconformity and Archean stromatolites. Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences V. 25 p. 370-391.

Younger, P.L., Banwart, S.A. and Hedin, R.S. 2002. Mine Water Hydroogy, Pollution, Remediation (Environmental Pollution Vol. 5 Edited by Alloway, B.J.) The Nethrlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers Dordrecht. 442 p.

WHO, 2004. Sulfate in drinking-water: background document for development of WHO guidelines for drinking-water quality. World Health Organization WHO/SDE/W SH/03.04/114 135

APPENDICES 136

APPENDIX I Pit Lake Volume Calculations 137

Volume Calculations Hoearth & South Roberts Pits Elevation Elevation Elevation Surface Area Surface Area Increment Volume Volume Accu. Volume I in IE' mz m r mJ mJ

350 107 120,000 11,148 12,000,000 339,804 339,804 450 137 700.000 65,030 - 69,600,000 1,970,863 2,310,667 550 168 1,370,000 127,273 - 136,800,000 3,873,766 6,184,433 650 198 2,250.000 209,025 - 224,800,000 6,365,662 12,550,094 656 200 - 203,285 2 - 412,297 12,962,391 689 210 - 227,493 10 - 2,152,755 15,115,147 722 220 - 257,195 10 - 2,421.918 17,537,065 755 230 - 326,279 10 - 2,910,527 20,447,591 787 240 - 383,765 10 - 3,546,335 23,993,926 820 250 - 443,218 10 - 4,131,350 28,125,276 853 260 - 516,338 10 - 4,793,129 32,918,405 886 270 - 594,288 10 - 5,548,561 38,466,966 919 280 - 723,967 10 - 6,580,615 45,047,582 951 290 - 892,445 10 - 8,067,386 53,114,967 984 300 - 1,153,413 10 - 10,201,433 63,316,400 1,017 310 - 1,428,569 10 - 12,885,404 76,201,804 1,050 320 - 1,657,287 10 - 15,415,136 91,616,940 1,083 330 - 1,885,570 10 - 17,702,012 109.318,952 1,115 340 - 2,124.754 10 - 20,039,719 129,358,671 1,148 350 - 2,336,667 10 - 22.298,713 151.657,383 1,181 360 - 2,564,542 10 - 24,497.209 176,154,593 1,214 370 - 2,782,689 10 - 26,728,731 202,883,324 1,247 380 - 3,007,558 10 - 28,943,954 231,827,278 1,280 390 - 12,255,672 10 - 71,114,818 302,942,096

1,312 400 - 15,090,689 10 - 136,486,219 439,428,314 Note: Between 107 m and 198 m in elevation surface area data taken fom the Steep Rock Environmental Plan (Capper, 1978) and fom 200 m to 400 m in elevation from contour data. 138

Volume Calculations Caland & Fairweather Lake Elevation Elevation Elevation Surface Area Surface Area Increment Volume Volume Accu. Volume f m r nr m ffJ mJ m* 300 91 86,000 7,989 - 4,300,000 121,763 121,763 350 107 220,000 20,438 - 22,000,000 622,974 4.421,763 450 137 1,050,000 97,545 - 105,000,000 2,973,285 7,395,048 550 168 2,650,000 246,185 - 265,000,000 7,504,005 14,899,053 623 190 403,058 22 - 7,186,844 22,085,898 656 200 - 468,151 10 - 4,351,986 26,437,884 689 210 - 533,470 10 - 5,004,554 31,442,438 722 220 - 595,153 10 - 5,640,306 37.082,744 755 230 - 699,952 10 - 6,468,449 43,551,193 787 240 - 801,325 10 - 7,500,674 51.051,867 820 250 - 926,292 10 - 8,630,539 59,682,406 853 260 - 1,063,724 10 - 9,942,161 69,624,567 886 270 - 1,211,989 10 - 11,370,505 80.995,072 919 280 - 1.418,072 10 - 13.136,825 94,131,897 951 290 - 1,612,916 10 - 15,144,491 109,276,388 984 300 - 2,092,535 10 - 18,475,302 127,751,690 1,017 310 - 2,426,946 10 - 22,576,757 150,328,447 1,050 320 - 2,819.470 10 - 26,207.576 176,536,024 1,083 330 - 3.232,622 10 - 30,236,929 206,772,953 1,115 340 - 3,800.716 10 - 35,128,386 241,901,338 1,148 350 - 4,621,438 10 - 42.043,963 283,945,301 1.181 360 - 5,124,131 10 - 48,706,226 332,651,527 1,214 370 - 5,565,141 10 - 53,431,191 386,082,718 1.247 380 - 6,894,340 10 - 62,178,896 448,261,614 1,280 390 - 12,255,672 10 - 94,473,719 542,735,333

1,312 400 - 15,090,689 10 - 136,486,219 679,221,552 Note: Between 107 m and 198 m in elevation surface area data taken ffom the Steep Rock Environmental Plan (Capper. 1978) and ffom 200 m to 400 m in elevation from contour data 139

APPENDIX II Estimating Precipitation Rates Using the Inversion Ration Method 140

Estimation of Missing Precipitation Data Using the Normal Inverse Ratio Method Estimate Precipitation Atikokan Fort Fort Mine Rawson Stratton Year Atikokan Dryden Dryden A p /p (tw) Marmion Frances Frances A Centre Lake Romyn 1978 0.943 697.3 671.7 568.9 535.3 767.4 814.2 696.7 632.7 1979 0.901 666.8 714.4 619.5 682.5 662.4 609 1980 0.835 618.0 696.7 562.9 638.1 582.8 617.5 544.7 1981 0,895 661.9 591.5 616.3 617.2 646.2 642.8 636.4 1982 1.061 784.6 832.7 766,3 768.2 764.9 681.5 709.4 826 1983 0.968 716.4 799.8 576.6 793.8 743.3 548.9 766 1984 0.958 708.8 732.7 709.6 671.6 684.8 596,8 722.2 1985 1.294 957.0 944.5 871.3 882.9 984.2 1986 0.917 678.6 664.3 718 683.4 631.6 629.4 642,2 580.4 1987 0.826 611.2 698.8 592.1 566.2 680.2 599.8 616.8 493.5 556.4 1988 1.033 763.9 635.1 659.2 807 759.7 988.3 639.2 648.6 1989 0.870 643.3 549.2 519.8 665.4 703.1 563.1 695 1990 0.885 654,3 682.5 695.8 626.9 618.7 688.6 548.2 532.8 1991 1.122 829.7 838.3 835.3 766.2 762.6 785.4 807 1992 1.178 871.6 908 824.3 800,5 845 835 799.8 1993 0.961 710.7 627,7 703.9 714 628.1 739.8 1994 1.034 764.9 793.7 712.3 638 688.6 733.1 769.2 795.8 1995 0.980 724.8 795 700.9 619.3 721.2 779.3 610.6 743.4 1996 1.352 1000.1 1010.2 892.2 838,2 1071.8 989.4 1002.2 1997 0.827 611.5 577.8 664.1 499.4 550.6 627.3 1998 0.926 684.7 675.5 647 716.7 598.4 664 1999 1.138 841.5 813.4 811.4 722.7 889.1 805.9 2000 1.133 838.1 775.1 846.1 734.2 723 923.1 787 2001 1.344 994.5 941 901.6 865.5 1070.8 979 2002 1.095 809.6 731.8 734.8 723.6 931 654.7 847.8 2003 0,858 634.8 842,3 642.5 552.6 622.5 616,7 2004 868.2 849.9 843.6 2005 905 949 Average Annual Precipitation Rates 739.7 705.5 701.5 709.3 720.7 728.6 688.4 711.1 Ouaiitv of Weather Station Data D A A A A A A C All values in mm/year except the ratio P, divided by Pj(barl A no more than 3 consective or 5 total missing years between 1971-2000 B at lease 25 years of record between 1971 -2000 C at lease 20 years of record between 1971-2000 _D at lease 15 years of record between 1971-2000 141

APPENDIX III Estimating Evaporation Rates Using the Penman and Thornwaite Equations 142

Evaporation Estimate Calculated Using the Penmen Equation Calaculation of Jin c, Qn (cal/m2.day) P (kg/m3) L (cal/kg) En (mm/day) May 1000 2275173.374 1000 591700 3.845146821 June 1000 2597307.781 1000 588900 4,410439432 July 1000 2524152.183 1000 586000 4.307426933 August 1000 1929306.652 1000 588900 3,276119294 September 1000 1070132.094 1000 591700 1.80857207 October 1000 366343,5761 1000 597300 0,613332624 Calculation of Ha

c3 x* r (%)* c2 (mm/day. mmHg) (mm. hour/day. km.m W (km/hour) es(inmHg)* Ea (mm/day) iiiHPI May 10.4 46,2 0.1733 0.0512 8.3 9.2 2.961147696 June 14.7 53.8 0.1733 0.0512 8.2 12.78 3.50211209 July 17.7 55,1 0.1733 0.0512 7,1 17.53 4,225294115 August 16.1 57,6 0.1733 0.0512 6.8 12.78 2.825645731 September 10.4 60.8 0.1733 0.0512 7.8 9.2 2.065241024 October 4.5 63.6 0.1733 0.0512 8.5 6.54 1.44857076 Calculation of PET T (jC)* a1 PET (mm/day) PET (mill/month) May 10.4 1.25 3 107 June 14.7 1.66 4 122 July 17.7 2.19 4 133 August 16.1 1.66 3 96 September 10.4 1.25 2 58 October 4.5 0.93 1 32 * Values taken from the 1971 - 2000 Canadian Climate Normals for the weather station Atikokan. 1 Values orginially from Ponce (1989)

Evaporation &timate Calculated Using the Thornwaite Equation mm/month T otal Hours per Average Hours of T„* I mm/month corrected for Sunlight Month* Sunlight per Day latitude May 10.4 3.030734475 248.6 8.019354839 13 16 June 14.7 5.117735756 247.7 8.256666667 18 25 July 17.7 6.779395 279.4 9.012903226 23 31 August 16.1 5.873456948 231.7 7.474193548 18 22 September 10.4 3.030734475 157.9 5.263333333 8 9 October 4.5 0.852556479 109.8 3.541935484 3 2 Sum of I = 25.10029078 in = 0.903394624 * Values taken from the 1971 - 2000 Canadian Climate Normals for the weather station Atikokan. 143

APPENDIX IV Water Balance and Rebound Model Results 144

Hogarth Groundwater Calcuiations m Vy ear nv'/day gpm MAX 2263000 6200 947 M1N -1788500 -4900 -749 AVERAGE 322319 883 3 35 Model 1A - Hogarth Pit Lake/Middle Arm Measured Annual Change in Water Pit Lake Watershed Year Runoff Pit Runoff Land Pit Evaporation Gwi - Gwo Accu. Volumt Water Precipitation Storage Elevation Surface Are; Area Elevation mm/vear m'/y ear nrVy ear nrVyear mVyear nrVyear nrVyear m m m' nr 1979 734 43631 2084474 29138 511000 2609967 3249081 148.7 148.7 61074 7294492 1980 697 42550 2032829 33157 -246375 1795847 5044928 171.1 94261 7261305 1981 592 55756 1718025 48563 -246375 1478842 6523770 184.1 121436 7234150 1982 833 101103 2409551 58268 -246375 2206011 8729781 198.9 3 61754 7193812 19S3 800 129371 2301444 93672 -246375 2090768 10820549 209.8 199839 7155727 1984 733 146422 2097200 82973 -246375 1934274 12734824 218.1 234611 7120955 1985 945 221590 2690297 97997 -246375 2567515 15302338 227.4 281124 7074442 1986 664 186751 1879823 151891 -246375 1668305 16970644 232.6 232.6 311282 7044284 1987 699 217524 3 969018 171330 -273750 1741463 18712106 237.6 342714 7012852 1988 764 261793 2142797 204223 -273750 1926617 20638723 242.6 242.6 377437 6978129 1989 643 242797 1795553 193021 401500 2246829 22885553 247.8 247.8 417868 6937698 1990 654 273431 1815863 213698 2263000 4138596 27024149 256.3 256.3 492188 6863378 1991 830 408375 2277859 251705 -1788500 646030 27670178 257.5 257.5 503772 6851794 1992 872 43911! 2388934 257629 839500 3409916 31080094 263.4 564854 6790712 1993 711 401462 3 930560 288866 839500 2882655 33962749 267.9 267.9 616411 6739155 1994 765 471462 2061780 315232 985500 3203510 37166259 272.4 673628 6681938 1995 795 535534 2124856 344493 985500 3301397 40467656 276.8 732515 6623051 1996 1010 739986 2676243 374608 985500 4027121 44494777 281.6 281.6 804248 6551318 1997 578 464694 1534141 411292 547500 2115043 46609820 283.9 841882 6513684 1998 676 568691 1759997 430538 547500 2445650 49055470 286.5 885366 6470200 1999 813 720157 2105144 452776 547500 2920025 51975495 289.5 289.5 937242 6418324 2000 775 726456 1989937 479306 -219000 2018088 53993583 291.4 291.4 973068 6382498 2003 842 932550 2105237 566195 219000 2690572 64246690 300.2 300.2 1154787 6200779 2004 868 1002586 2153406 590558 -109500 2455935 66702625 302.1 1198246 6157320 2005 905 1084413 2228950 612783 -109500 2593 079 69293704 304.1 1244070 6111496 2006 740 920114 1808025 636217 -109500 1982422 71276126 305.5 1279112 6076454 2007 740 946031 3 797658 654138 -109500 1980051 73256177 306.9 306.9 1314097 6041469 2008 740 973906 3 787308 672029 1460000 3547185 76803363 309.3 309.3 1376737 5978829 2009 740 3 018234 1768777 704063 912500 2995448 79798811 311.2 311.2 1429598 5925968 2010 740 1057331 1753138 731096 322319 2401691 82200502 312.8 312.7 1471960 5883606 2011 740 3 088661 1740606 752760 322319 2398826 84599328 313.7 314.2 1514252 5841314 2012 740 3119941 3 728094 774388 322319 2395965 86995293 315.6 1556475 5799091 2013 740 3151169 1715603 795982 322319 2393109 89388402 317.0 1598631 5756935 2014 740 1182347 3 703132 817540 322319 2390258 91778660 318.3 1640719 5714847 2015 740 1213476 1690680 839064 322319 2387411 94166071 319.6 1682740 5672826 2016 740 1244555 1678249 860553 322319 2384569 96550640 320.9 1724695 5630871 2017 740 1275585 1665837 882009 322319 2381731 98932370 322.1 1766585 5588981 203 8 740 1306566 1653444 903432 322319 2378897 101311268 323.3 3 808409 5547357 2019 740 1337499 1641071 924820 322319 2376068 103687336 324.5 1850169 5505397 2020 740 1368385 1628717 946176 322319 2373244 106060580 325.7 1891864 5463702 2021 740 1399223 1616382 967499 322319 2370423 108431003 326.8 1933496 5422070 2022 740 1430014 1604065 988790 322319 2367608 110798611 327.9 1975064 5380502 2023 740 1460758 1591768 1010048 322319 2364796 113163407 329.0 2016570 5338996 2024 740 1491455 1579489 1031274 322319 2363988 115525395 330.0 2058013 5297553 2025 740 1522106 1567228 3 052468 322319 2359185 117884580 331.0 2099394 5256172 2026 740 1552732 1554986 1073630 322319 2356386 120240967 332.0 2140713 5214853 2027 740 1583272 1542762 1094761 322319 2353591 122594558 333.0 2181971 5173595 2028 740 1613786 1530556 1115860 322319 2350801 124945359 334.0 2223168 5132398 2029 740 1644255 15 3 8369 1136928 322319 2348014 127293373 334.9 2264305 5091261 2030 740 1674680 1506399 1157965 322319 2345232 129638604 335.9 2305381 5050185 2031 740 1705060 1494047 1178972 322319 2342453 131981057 336.8 2346397 5009169 2032 740 1735395 1481913 1199947 322339 2339679 134320736 337.7 2387354 4968232 2033 740 1765687 1469796 1220893 322319 2336909 136657645 338.5 2428251 4927315 2034 740 1795934 1457697 1241808 322319 2334142 138991787 339.4 2469089 4886477 2035 740 1826138 1445615 1262692 322319 2331380 141323167 340.2 2509868 4845698 2036 740 1856299 1433551 1283547 322319 2328622 143651789 341.1 2550589 4804977 2037 740 1886416 1423 504 1304371 322319 2325867 145977656 341.9 2591252 4764314 2038 740 1916490 3409475 1325166 322319 2323117 148300773 342.7 2631857 4723709 2039 740 1946521 3397462 1345932 322319 2320370 150623 144 343.5 2672404 4683162 2040 740 1976510 3 385467 1366667 322319 2317628 152938771 344.3 2712894 4642672 2041 740 2006456 3373488 1387374 322319 2314889 155253660 345.0 2753326 4602240 2042 740 2036360 3361527 1408051 322319 2312154 157565815 345.8 2793702 4561864 2043 740 2066222 3 349582 1428699 322319 2309423 159875238 346.5 2834021 4523 545 2044 740 2096042 1337654 1449318 322319 2306696 162181934 347.2 2874283 2045 740 2125820 1325743 1469909 322319 2303973 164485906 347.9 2914490 2046 740 2155557 1313848 1490470 322319 2301253 166787160 348.7 2954640 2047 740 2185252 1301970 1511003 322319 2298537 169085697 349.3 2994734 2048 740 2214905 1290108 1531507 322319 2295825 171381522 350.0 3034773 2049 740 2244518 1278263 1551983 322319 2293117 173674639 350.7 3074756 2050 740 2274090 1266435 1572430 322319 2290413 175965052 351.4 3114685 205] 740 2303621 1254622 1592850 322319 2287712 178252764 352.0 3154558 2052 740 2333111 1242826 1613241 322319 2285015 180537779 352.7 3194376 2053 740 2362561 1231046 1633604 322319 2282322 182820101 353.3 3234140 2054 740 2391970 1219283 1653939 322319 2279632 185099732 353.9 3273850 2055 740 2421339 1207535 1674247 322319 2276946 187376678 354.6 3313505 2056 740 2450668 1195803 1694526 322319 2274264 189650942 355.2 3353106 2057 740 2479957 1184088 1714778 322319 2271585 191922527 355.8 3392654 2058 740 2509207 1172388 1735003 322319 2268910 194191437 356.4 3432147 2059 740 2538416 1160704 1755200 322319 2266239 196457676 357.0 3471587 2060 740 2567586 1149036 1775370 322319 2263571 198721247 357.5 3510974 2061 740 2596716 1137384 1795512 322319 2260907 200982154 358.1 3550308 2062 740 2625808 1125748 1815627 322319 2258246 203240400 358.7 3589588 2063 740 2654860 1114127 1835716 322319 2255589 205495990 359.2 3628816 2064 740 2683872 1102522 1855777 322319 2252936 207748926 359.8 3667991 2065 740 2712846 1090932 1875811 322319 2250286 209999212 360.3 3707114 2066 740 2741781 1079358 1895818 322319 2247640 212246852 360.9 3746184 2067 740 2770678 1067800 1915798 322319 2244997 214491850 361.4 3785202 2068 740 2799535 1056257 1935752 322319 2242358 216734208 361.9 3824168 2069 740 2828354 1044729 1955679 322319 2239722 218973930 362.5 3863082 2070 740 2857135 1033217 1975580 322319 2237090 221211021 363.0 3901944 2071 740 2885878 1021720 1995454 322319 2234462 223445482 363.5 3940754 2072 740 2914582 1010238 2015302 322319 2231837 225677319 364.0 3979513 2073 740 2943248 998771 2035123 322319 2229215 227906534 364.5 4018221 2074 740 2971876 987320 2054918 322319 2226597 230133130 365.0 4056877 2075 740 3000467 975884 2074687 322319 2223982 232357112 365.5 4095483 2076 740 3029019 964463 2094430 1125319 3024371 235381483 366.1 4147973 2077 740 3067841 8228044 2121273 1125319 10299930 245681413 368.3 4326659 2078 740 3]99997 8175182 2212653 1125319 10287844 255969257 370.4 4505021 2079 740 3331914 8122415 2303868 1125319 10275779 266245036 372.4 4683066 2080 740 3463596 8069742 2394920 1125319 10263736 276508773 374.3 4860797 2081 740 3595046 8017162 2485812 1125319 10251715 286760487 376.2 5038220 2082 740 3726268 7964673 2576546 1125319 10239714 297000201 377.9 5215339 2083 740 3857265 7912275 2667124 1125319 10227733 307227935 379.7 5392157 2084 740 3988040 7859965 2757549 1125319 10215773 317443708 381.3 5568680 2085 740 4118596 7807742 2847823 1125319 10203833 327647541 382.9 5744910 2086 740 4248935 7755606 2937947 1125319 10191913 337839455 384.5 5920850 2087 740 4379061 7703556 3027923 1125319 10180013 348019467 386.0 6096504 2088 740 4508975 7651591 3117752 1125319 10168131 358187599 387.5 6271876 2089 740 4638679 7599709 3207437 1125319 10156269 368343868 388.9 6446966 2090 740 4768176 7547910 3296979 1125319 10144426 378488294 390.2 6621780 2091 740 4897468 7496193 3386378 1125319 10132602 388620896 391.6 6796318 2092 740 5026557 7444558 3475637 1125319 10120796 398741692 392.9 6970584 2093 740 5155444 7393003 3564757 1125319 10109009 408850701 394.2 7144580 146

Caland G roundwater Calculations nr'fyear mVday gpm MAX 5475000 15000 2291 MIN -2482000 -6800 -1039 AVERAGE 803000 2200 336 Model 1A Caland Pit Late and Faireweather Late/East and Southeast Arms Measured Annual Change in Water Pit Lake Watershed Year Runoff Pit Runoff Land Pit Evaporation Gwi-Gwo Accu. Volume Water Precipitation Storage Elevation Surface Are: Area Elevation mm A'ear mVvear mVyear mVyear nrVyear mVyear mVyear m nr m2 1981 592 34045 3977525 12233 803000 4782337 3330786 137.2 23744 16811379 1982 833 310799 5563057 63855 803000 6413000 9743786 173.4 133060 16701863 1983 800 196160 5307365 142031 803000 6164494 15908279 196.1 245261 16589662 1984 733 254056 4832357 143966 803000 5745447 21653726 211 7 346740 16488183 1985 945 442668 6183367 195768 803000 7233067 28886793 226.3 468680 16366243 1986 664 344226 4335685 279972 -1350500 3049440 31936233 231.3 231.3 518178 16316745 1987 699 362103 4560857 285205 -2482000 2155754 34091987 234.6 552522 16282401 3988 764 422061 4975135 329248 -2482000 2585949 36677936 238.3 238.3 593038 16243 885 1989 643 381489 4179225 303280 438000 4695434 41373370 244.4 244.4 664808 16170115 1990 654 435035 4232344 339983 2445500 6772875 48146245 252.1 252.1 764556 16070367 1991 830 634364 5333529 390994 -2007500 3569399 51735644 255.7 255.7 815479 16019444 1992 872 710808 5585310 417036 -91250 5787833 57503477 261.0 895840 15939083 1993 711 636705 4531388 458133 -91250 461873 0 62122187 264.9 264.9 958149 15876774 1994 765 732841 4857348 489997 1460000 6560391 68682379 270.0 1044102 3 5790821 1995 795 830061 5021481 533954 1460000 6777588 75459967 274.8 1130025 3 5704898 3996 1010 1141551 6346035 577895 1460000 8369692 83829659 280.1 280.1 1232477 3 5602446 1997 578 712125 3606037 630288 803000 4490874 88320533 282.7 1285920 3 5549003 1998 676 868639 4201341 657639 803000 5215360 93535893 285.6 1346741 3 5488182 1999 813 1095439 5039235 688723 803000 6248951 99784844 288 9 288.9 1417962 15416961 2000 775 1099062 4779875 725146 36500 5190291 3 04975135 291.4 291.4 1475831 15359092 2001 943 1388757 5781162 754740 2518500 8933679 113908814 295.6 295.6 1572893 15262030 2002 732 1151043 4467501 804377 5475000 10289167 124197981 299.9 299.9 (683014 15153909 2005 905 1631367 5441695 923858 803000 6954205 143151544 307.1 1871064 14963859 2006 740 3 383839 4426908 956862 803000 5656885 14S808428 309.1 1925722 14909201 2007 740 1424264 4410738 984814 803000 5653188 154463616 310.9 310.9 1979473 14855450 2008 740 1464018 4394836 1012303 3358000 8204552 162666168 313.6 333.6 2056012 14778911 2009 740 1520627 4372193 1051445 3431000 8272375 170938543 336.3 316.3 2331517 14703406 2010 740 1576470 4349856 1090058 803000 5639268 176577813 33 7.9 317.7 23 82080 14652843 201 740 1633866 4334897 1115916 803000 5635848 382213659 3189 319.3 2231909- 14603014 2012 740 1650720 4320156 1343398 803000 5632477 3 878463 36 320.8 2281034 14553889 2013 740 1687053 4305623 1366521 803000 5629154 3 93475290 322.3 2329480 14505443 2014 740 1722884 4291290 1191296 803000 5625878 399303 3 68 323.8 2377274 22227613 2015 740 3 758232 6575817 3215738 803000 7921311 207022479 325.7 2443550 22161337 2016 740 1807250 6556210 1249632 803000 7916828 214939307 327.6 2508653 22096234 203 7 740 1855400 6536950 1282925 803000 7912424 222851732 329.5 2572637 22032250 2018 740 1902722 6518023 1315647 803000 7908097 230759828 331.2 2635553 21969334 2019 740 1949255 6499408 1347822 803000 7903841 238663669 332.9 2697449 21907438 2020 740 1995034 6483096 1379476 803000 7899654 246563323 334.6 2758369 21846518 2021 740 2040090 6463074 1410630 803000 7895534 254458857 336.1 2818353 21786534 2022 740 2084454 6445328 1441306 803000 7891476 262350333 337.7 2877439 21727448 2023 740 2128154 6427848 1471522 803000 7887480 270237813 339.2 2935664 21669223 2024 740 2171217 6410623 1501298 803000 7883541 278321355 340.6 2993060 23613827 2025 740 2213667 6393643 3 530653 803000 7879659 286001014 342 1 3049658 21555229 2026 740 2255527 6376899 3 559595 803000 7875831 293876845 343.4 3105488 21499399 2027 740 2296819 6360382 1588146 803000 7872055 301748899 344.8 3160577 21444310 2028 740 2337563 6344085 1616319 803000 7868328 309617228 346.1 3214951 2I3S9936 2029 740 2377778 6327999 1644126 803000 7864650 317481878 347.3 3268635 21336252 2030 740 2417482 6312117 1671580 803000 7861019 325342898 348.6 3323651 21283236 2031 740 2456693 6296433 1698692 803000 7857433 333200331 349.8 3374022 21230865 2032 740 2495426 6280939 1725475 803000 7853891 343 054222 350.9 3425767 23179120 2033 740 2533698 6265631 1751937 803000 7850391 348904613 352.1 3476908 21127979 2034 740 2571521 6250501 1778091 803000 7846932 356751544 353.2 3527462 21077425 2035 740 2608911 6235546 3 803944 803000 7843512 364595057 354.3 3577446 21027441 2036 740 2645879 6220758 1829506 803000 7840131 3724353 88 355.4 3626878 20978009 2037 740 2682439 6206134 1854786 803000 7836788 380271976 356.4 3675774 20929113 2038 740 2718603 6191669 1879791 803000 7833480 388105456 357.5 3724349 20880738 2039 740 2754380 63 77358 1904530 803000 7830208 395935664 358.5 3772017 20832870 2040 740 2789784 6163396 1929009 803000 7826971 403762635 359.5 3819392 20785495 2041 740 2824822 6149181 1953237 803000 7823766 413 586403 360.4 3866288 20738599 2042 740 2859506 6135307 1977220 803000 7820594 419406995 361.4 3912717 20692170 2043 740 2893845 6121572 2000963 803000 7817454 427224449 362.3 3958693 20646196 2044 740 2927848 6107971 2024474 803000 7814344 435038793 363.2 4004222 20600665 2045 740 2963 522 6094501 2047759 803000 7811264 442850057 364.1 4049320 20555567 740 2994877 6081159 2070822 803000 7808214 450658271 365.0 2047 740 3027921 6067941 2093671 803000 7805192 458463462 365.9 2048 740 3060660 6054846 2116308 803000 7802198 466265660 366.7 2049 740 3093103 6041869 2138741 803000 7799231 474064891 367.6 2050 740 3125256 6029008 2160973 803000 7796290 481861181 368.4 2051 740 3157125 6016260 2183010 803000 7793375 489654556 369.2 2052 740 3188718 6003622 2204855 803000 7790486 497445042 370.0 2053 740 3220041 5991093 2226513 803000 7787621 505232663 370.8 2054 740 3251099 5978670 2247988 803000 7784781 513017444 371.6 2055 740 3281899 5966350 2269285 803000 7781964 520799409 372.3 2056 740 3312445 5954132 2290406 803000 7779171 528578579 373.1 2057 740 3342744 5942012 2311356 803000 7776400 536354979 373.8 2058 740 3372800 5929990 2332139 803000 7773651 544128630 374.5 2059 740 3402619 5918062 2352757 S03000 7770924 551899554 375.3 2060 740 3432205 5906228 2373215 803000 7768218 559667772 376.0 2061 740 3461564 5894484 2393515 803000 7765533 567433305 376.7 2062 740 3490698 5882830 2413660 803000 7762869 575196173 377.3 2063 740 3519614 5871264 2433654 803000 7760224 582956397 378.0 2064 740 3548315 5859784 2453500 803000 7757599 590713996 378.7 2065 740 3576806 5848388 2473200 S03000 7754994 598468990 379.3 2066 740 3605089 5837074 2492756 803000 7752407 606221397 380.0 2067 740 3633170 5825842 2512173 803000 7749839 613971236 380.6 2068 740 3661052 5814689 2531452 803000 7747289 621718524 381.3 2069 740 3688738 5803615 2550596 803000 7744757 629463281 381.9 2070 740 3716232 5792617 2569607 803000 7742242 637205524 382.5 2071 740 3743538 5781695 2588487 803000 7739745 644945269 383.1 2072 740 3770659 5770846 2607240 803000 7737265 652682533 383.7 2073 740 3797597 5760071 2625867 803000 7734801 660417335 384.3 2074 740 3824357 5749367 2644370 803000 7732354 668149688 384.9 2075 740 3850941 5738733 2662752 803000 7729923 675879611 385.5 148

Hogarth Groundwater Calculations m3/year m 3/day gpm MAX 2263000 6200 947 M1N -1788500 -4900 -749 AVERAGE 322295 883 135 Model IB - Hogarth Pit Late/Middle Arm Measured Pit Lake Annual Runoff Change in Water Watershed Year Runoff Pit Pit Evaporation Gwi-Gwo Accu. Volume Water Surface Precipitation Land Storage Elevation Area Elevation Area m m/year m'Vvear mVyear nrVyear iirVy ear nrVyear mVyear ni m m2 nr 1979 714 43631 2084474 29138 511000 2609967 3249081 148.7 148.7 61074 7294492 1980 697 42550 2032829 33157 -246375 1795847 5044928 171.1 94261 7261305 1981 592 55756 1718025 48563 -246375 1478842 6523770 184.1 121416 7234150 1982 833 101103 2409551 58268 -246375 2206011 8729781 198.9 161754 7193812 1983 800 129371 2301444 93672 -246375 2090768 10820549 209.8 199839 7155727 1984 733 146422 2097200 82973 -246375 1914274 12734824 218.1 234611 7120955 1985 945 221590 2690297 97997 -246375 2567515 15302338 227.4 281124 7074442 1986 664 186751 1879821 151891 -246375 1668305 16970644 232.6 232.6 311282 7044284 1987 699 217524 1969018 171330 -273750 1741463 18712106 237.6 342714 7012852 1988 764 261793 2142797 204223 -273750 1926617 20638723 242.6 242.6 377437 6978129 1989 643 242797 1795553 193021 401500 2246829 22885553 247.8 247.8 417868 6937698 1990 654 273431 1815863 213698 2263000 4138596 27024149 256.3 256.3 492188 6863378 1991 830 408375 2277859 251705 -1788500 646030 27670178 257.5 257.5 503772 6851794 1992 872 439111 2388934 257629 839500 3409916 31080094 263.4 564854 6790712 1993 711 401462 1930560 288866 839500 2882655 33962749 267.9 267.9 616411 6739155 1994 765 471462 2061780 315232 985500 3203510 37166259 272.4 673628 6681938 1995 795 535534 2124856 344493 985500 3301397 40467656 276.8 732515 6623051 1996 1010 739986 2676243 374608 985500 4027121 44494777 281.6 281.6 804248 6551318 1997 578 464694 1514141 411292 547500 2115043 46609820 283.9 841882 6513684 1998 676 568691 1759997 430538 547500 2445650 49055470 286.5 885366 6470200 1999 813 720157 2105144 452776 547500 2920025 51975495 289.5 289.5 937242 6418324 2000 775 726456 1989937 479306 -219000 2018088 53993583 291.4 291.4 973068 6382498 2003 842 932550 2105217 566195 219000 2690572 64246690 300.2 300.2 1154787 6200779 2004 868 1002586 2153406 590558 322295 2887730 67134420 302.5 1205884 6149682 2005 905 1091325 2226185 616689 322295 3023116 70157536 304.7 1259341 6096225 2006 740 931409 1803507 644027 322295 2413184 72570719 306,4 1301988 6053578 2007 740 962950 1790891 665837 322295 2410299 74981019 306.9 308.1 1344562 6011004 2008 740 994438 1778296 687609 322295 2407419 77388438 309.3 309.7 1387064 5968502 2009 740 1025873 1765722 709345 322295 2404545 79792983 311.2 311.2 1429495 5926071 2010 740 1057255 1753169 731044 322295 2401675 82194657 312.8 312.7 1471857 5883709 2011 740 1088585 1740637 752707 322295 2398809 84593467 313.7 314.2 1514149 5841417 2012 740 1119864 1728125 774336 322295 2395949 86989415 315.6 1556372 5799194 2013 740 1151093 1715634 795929 322295 2393093 89382508 317.0 1598527 5757039 2014 740 1182271 1703162 817487 322295 2390241 91772749 318.3 1640615 5714951 2015 740 1213399 1690711 839010 322295 2387394 94160144 319.6 1682636 5672930 2016 740 1244478 1678280 860500 322295 2384552 96544696 320.9 1724591 5630975 2017 740 1275507 1665868 881956 322295 2381714 98926410 322.1 1766480 5589086 2018 740 1306489 1653475 903378 322295 2378881 101305291 323.3 1808304 5547262 2019 740 1337422 1641102 924767 322295 2376052 103681343 324.5 1850064 5505502 2020 740 1368307 1628748 946122 322295 2373227 106054570 325.7 1891759 5463807 2021 740 1399145 1616413 967445 322295 2370407 108424977 326.8 1933390 5422176 2022 740 1429935 1604097 988736 322295 2367591 110792568 327.9 1974958 5380608 2023 740 1460679 1591799 1009994 322295 2364779 113157348 329.0 2016464 5339102 2024 740 1491376 1579520 1031219 322295 2361972 315519320 330.0 2057906 5297660 2025 740 1522028 1567260 1052413 322295 2359169 117878489 331.0 2099287 5256279 2026 740 1552633 1555018 1073575 322295 2356370 120234859 332.0 2140606 5214960 2027 740 1583192 1542794 1094706 322295 2353575 122588434 333.0 2181864 5173702 2028 740 1613707 1530588 1115805 322295 2350784 124939218 334.0 2223061 5132505 2029 740 1644176 1518400 1136873 322295 2347998 127287216 334.9 2264197 5091369 2030 740 1674600 1506231 1157910 322295 2345235 129632431 335.9 2305273 5050293 2031 740 1704980 1494079 1178917 322295 2342437 131974868 336.8 2346289 5009277 2032 740 1735315 1481945 1199892 322295 2339663 134314531 337.7 2387245 4968321 2033 740 1765606 1469828 1220837 322295 2336892 136651423 338.5 2428142 4927424 2034 740 1795854 1457729 1241752 322295 2334126 138985549 339.4 2468980 4886586 2035 740 1826058 1445648 1262636 322295 2331364 141316913 340.2 2509759 4845807 2036 740 1856218 1433584 1283491 322295 2328606 143645519 341.1 2550480 4805086 2037 740 1886335 1421537 1304315 322295 2325851 145971370 341.9 2591142 4764424 2038 740 1916409 1409507 1325110 322295 2323101 148294471 342.7 2631747 4723819 2039 740 1946440 1397495 1345875 322295 2320354 150614825 343.5 2672294 4683272 2040 740 1976428 1385499 1366611 322295 2317612 152932437 344.2 2712783 4642783 2041 740 2006374 1373521 1387317 322295 2314873 155247310 345.0 2753215 4602351 2042 740 2036278 1361559 1407994 322295 2312138 157559448 345.8 2793591 4561975 2043 740 2066140 1349615 1428642 322295 2309407 159868855 346.5 2833910 4521656 2044 740 2095959 1337687 1449261 322295 2306680 162175535 347.2 2045 740 2125737 1325776 1469851 322295 2303957 164479492 347.9 2046 740 2155474 1313881 1490413 322295 2301237 166780729 348.6 2047 740 2185169 1302003 1510945 322295 2298521 169079250 349.3 2048 740 2214822 1290142 1531450 322295 2295809 171375060 350.0 2049 740 2244435 1278297 1551925 322295 2293101 173668161 350.7 2050 740 2274006 1266468 1572373 322295 2290397 175958558 351.4 2051 740 2303537 1254656 1592792 322295 2287696 178246254 352.0 2052 740 2333027 1242860 1613183 322295 2284999 180531253 352.7 2053 740 2362477 1231080 1633546 322295 2282306 182833559 353.3 2054 740 2391886 1219316 1653881 322295 2279616 185093175 353.9 2055 740 2421255 1207569 1674188 322295 2276930 187370105 354.6 2056 740 2450584 1195837 1694468 322295 2274248 189644353 355.2 2057 740 2479872 1184122 1714720 322295 2271569 191915922 355,8 2058 740 2509122 1172422 1734944 322295 2268894 194184816 356.4 2059 740 2538331 1160738 1755141 322295 2266223 196451039 357,0 2060 740 2567501 1149070 1775311 322295 2263555 198714595 357.5 2061 740 2596631 1137418 1795453 322295 2260891 200975486 358.1 2062 740 2625722 1125782 1815568 322295 2258231 203233717 358,7 2063 740 2654774 1114161 1835656 322295 2255574 205489290 359.2 2064 740 2683786 1102556 1855717 322295 2252920 207742211 359.8 2065 740 2712760 1090967 1875751 322295 2250271 209992481 360.3 2066 740 2741695 1079393 1895758 322295 2247624 212240106 360,9 2067 740 2770591 1067834 1915738 322295 2244982 214485087 361.4 2068 740 2799448 1056291 1935692 322295 2242343 216727430 361.9 2069 740 2828267 1044764 1955619 322295 2239707 218967137 362.5 2070 740 2857048 1033251 1975520 322295 2237075 221204212 363.0 2071 740 2885790 1021755 1995394 322295 2234446 223438658 363.5 2072 740 2914494 1010273 2015241 322295 2231821 225670479 364.0 2073 740 2943160 998807 2035062 322295 2229199 227899678 364.5 2074 740 2971788 987355 2054857 322295 2226581 230126259 365.0 2075 740 3000378 975919 2074626 322295 2223967 232350226 365.5 2076 740 3028931 964498 2094369 322295 2221355 234571581 366,0 2077 740 3057445 953093 2114085 322295 2218747 236790329 366.4 2078 740 3085922 941702 2133776 942795 2836643 239626972 367.0 2079 740 3122324 8206251 2158946 942795 10112424 249739396 369.1 2080 740 3252041 8154364 2248639 942795 10100561 259839956 371.2 2081 740 3381525 8102570 2338172 942795 10088719 269928675 373.1 2082 740 3510781 8050868 2427547 942795 10076897 280005572 375.0 2083 740 3639813 7999255 2516766 942795 10065097 290070669 376.7 2084 740 3768622 7947731 2605832 942795 10053317 300123986 378.5 2085 740 3897213 7896295 2694747 942795 10041556 310165542 380.1 2086 740 4025588 7844945 2783513 942795 10029816 320195358 381.8 2087 740 4153750 7793680 2872131 942795 10018095 330213453 383.3 2088 740 4281701 7742500 2960603 942795 10006393 340219846 384.8 2089 740 4409444 7691403 3048931 942795 9994710 350214556 386.3 2090 740 4536980 7640388 3137117 942795 9983047 360197603 387.7 2091 740 4664312 7589456 3225161 942795 9971402 370169004 389.1 2092 740 4791442 7538604 3313066 942795 9959775 380128779 390.5 2093 740 4918372 7487832 3400832 942795 9948167 390076946 391.8 2094 740 5045103 7437139 3488461 942795 9936576 400013522 393.1 2095 740 5171637 7386526 3575954 942795 9925004 409938526 394.3 150

Caland G roundwater Calculations m3/year m3/day gpm MAX 5475000 15000 2291 MIN -2482000 -6800 -1039 AVERAGE 620500 1700 260 Model IB Caland Pit Lake and Faireweather Late/East and Southeast Arms Measured Pit Lake Annual Runoff Change in Water Watershed Year Runoff Pit Pit Evaporation Gwi-Gwo Accu. Volunu Water Surface Precipitation Land Storage Elevation Area Elevation Area mm/vear mVvear mVyear mVyear mVyear mVyear mVyear in ni2 nr 1981 592 20367 3974996 17739 620500 4598123 4061162 127,2 34432 16800491 1982 833 119131 5559724 68657 620500 6230697 10291859 174.1 143065 16691858 1983 800 201406 5305266 145829 620500 5981343 16273202 197.3 251820 16583103 1984 733 256370 4831431 145277 620500 5563024 21836226 212.1 349897 16485026 1985 945 442668 6183167 195768 620500 7050567 28886793 226.3 468680 16366243 1986 664 344226 4335685 279972 -1350500 3049440 31936233 231.3 231.3 518178 16316745 1987 699 362103 4560857 285205 -2482000 2155754 34091987 234.6 552522 16282401 1988 764 422061 4975135 329248 -2482000 2585949 36677936 238.3 238.3 593038 16241885 1989 643 381489 4179225 303280 438000 4695434 41373370 244.4 244.4 664808 16170115 1990 654 435015 4232344 339983 2445500 6772875 48146245 252.1 252.1 764556 16070367 1991 830 634364 5333529 390994 -2007500 3569399 51715644 255.7 255.7 815479 16019444 1992 872 710808 5585310 417036 -91250 5787833 57503477 261.0 895840 15939083 1993 711 636705 4531388 458133 -91250 4618710 62122187 264.9 264.9 958149 15876774 1994 765 732841 4857348 489997 1460000 6560191 68682379 270.0 1044102 15790821 1995 795 830061 5021481 533954 1460000 6777588 75459967 274.8 1130025 15704898 1996 1010 1141551 6346035 577895 1460000 8369692 83829659 280,1 280.1 1232477 15602446 1997 578 712125 3606037 630288 803000 4490874 88320533 282.7 1285920 15549003 1998 676 868639 4201341 657619 803000 5215360 93535893 285.6 1346741 15488182 1999 813 1095439 5039235 688723 803000 6248951 99784844 288.9 288.9 1417962 15416961 2000 775 1099062 4779875 725146 36500 5190291 104975135 291.4 291.4 1475831 15359092 2001 941 1388757 5781162 754740 2518500 8933679 113908814 295.6 295.6 1572893 15262030 2002 732 1151043 4467501 804377 5475000 10289167 124197981 299.9 299.9 1681014 15153909 2005 905 1629724 5442353 920929 620500 6771647 142786486 307.0 1867506 14967417 2006 740 1381207 4427961 955043 620500 5474626 148261112 308.9 1920472 14914451 2007 740 1420381 4412291 982130 620500 5471043 153732155 310.9 310.7 1972585 14862338 2008 740 1458924 4396874 1008780 620500 5467518 159199672 313.6 312.5 2023881 14811042 2009 740 1496862 4381699 1035013 620500 5464048 164663721 316.1 314.2 2074394 14760529 2010 740 1534222 4366755 1060845 620500 5460632 170124352 317.9 315.8 2124157 14710766 2011 740 1571027 4352033 1086294 620500 5457266 175581618 318.9 317.4 2173200 14661723 2012 740 1607298 4337524 1111374 620500 5453948 181035566 319.0 2221550 14613373 2013 740 1643058 4323220 1136101 620500 5450678 186486244 320,5 2269234 14565689 2014 740 1678325 4309114 1160486 620500 5447453 191933697 321.9 2316276 22288611 2015 740 1713118 6593863 1 184544 620500 7742937 199676634 323,9 2382128 22222759 2016 740 1761822 6574381 1218220 620500 7738483 207415117 325.8 2446806 22158081 2017 740 1809657 6555247 1251296 620500 7734108 215149224 327.7 2510364 22094523 2018 740 1856666 6536444 1283800 620500 7729809 222879033 329,5 2572856 22032031 2019 740 1902884 6517956 1315759 620500 7725582 230604615 331.2 2634328 21970559 2020 740 1948349 6499770 1347195 620500 7721424 238326039 332.8 2694825 21910062 2021 740 1993093 6481873 1378133 620500 7717332 246043371 334.5 2754387 21850500 2022 740 2037145 6464252 1408594 620500 7713303 253756674 336.0 2813054 21791833 2023 740 2080535 6446896 1438596 620500 7709335 261466008 337.5 2870860 21734027 2024 740 2123288 6429795 1468158 620500 7705425 269171433 339.0 2927839 21677048 2025 740 2165430 6412938 1497297 620500 7701571 276873004 340.4 2984023 21620864 2026 740 2206983 6396316 1526029 620500 7697770 284570774 341.8 3039440 21565447 2027 740 2247970 6379922 1554370 620500 7694022 292264796 343.1 3094119 21510768 2028 740 2288411 6363746 1582333 620500 7690324 299955120 344.5 3148085 21456802 2029 740 2328324 6347780 1609931 620500 7686673 307641793 345.7 3201363 21403524 2030 740 2367728 6332019 1637177 620500 7683070 315324863 347.0 3253976 21350911 2031 740 2406640 6316454 1664083 620500 7679511 323004374 348.2 3305945 21298942 2032 740 2445077 6301079 1690660 620500 7675996 330680369 349.4 3357292 21247595 2033 740 2483053 6285888 1716919 620500 7672523 338352892 350.5 3408036 21196851 2034 740 2520584 6270876 1742870 620500 7669090 346021982 351,7 3458196 21146691 2035 740 2557682 6256037 1768521 620500 7665697 353687679 352.8 3507789 21097098 2036 740 2594361 6241366 1793883 620500 7662343 361350022 353.9 3556832 21048055 2037 740 2630633 6226857 1818964 620500 7659026 369009048 354,9 3605341 20999546 2038 740 2666510 6212506 1843771 620500 7655745 376664792 356.0 3653331 20951556 2039 740 2702004 6198308 1868314 620500 7652498 384317291 357.0 3700817 20904070 2040 740 2737124 6184260 1892598 620500 7649287 391966577 358.0 3747813 20857074 2041 740 2771882 6170357 1916631 620500 7646108 399612685 358.9 3794331 20810556 2042 740 2806287 6156595 1940421 620500 7642961 407255646 359.9 3840385 20764502 2043 740 2840349 6142970 1963973 620500 7639846 414895492 360.8 3885987 20718900 2044 740 2874076 6129479 1987294 620500 7636762 422532254 361.8 3931148 20673739 2045 740 2907477 6116119 2010389 620500 7633707 430165961 362.7 3975879 20629008 2046 740 2940560 6102886 2033264 620500 7630681 437796642 363.6 2047 740 2973333 6089776 2055926 620500 7627684 445424326 364.4 2048 740 3005804 6076788 2078378 620500 7624714 453049041 365.3 2049 740 3037980 6063918 2100626 620500 7621772 460670813 366.1 2050 740 3069867 6051163 2122675 620500 7618856 468289668 367.0 2051 740 3101473 6038520 2144529 620500 7615965 475905633 367.8 2052 740 3132804 6025988 2166193 620500 7613100 483518733 368.6 2053 740 3163867 6013563 2187671 620500 7610259 491128992 369.4 2054 740 3194666 6001243 2208967 620500 7607442 498736434 370,1 2055 740 3225208 5989026 2230086 620500 7604649 506341083 370.9 2056 740 3255499 5976910 2251031 620500 7601879 513942961 371.7 2057 740 3285544 5964892 2271805 620500 7599131 521542092 372.4 2058 740 3315348 5952971 2292413 620500 7596405 529138497 373.1 2059 740 3344916 5941143 2312858 620500 7593701 536732198 373.8 2060 740 3374252 5929409 2333143 620500 7591018 544323216 374.6 2061 740 3403363 5917765 2353272 620500 7588356 551911572 375.3 2062 740 3432251 5906209 2373247 620500 7585714 559497286 375,9 2063 740 3460922 5894741 2393071 620500 7583092 567080378 376.6 2064 740 3489379 5883358 2412748 620500 7580489 574660867 377.3 2065 740 3517627 5872059 2432280 620500 7577906 582238773 378,0 2066 740 3545670 5860842 2451670 620500 7575341 589814114 378.6 2067 740 3573511 5849705 2470921 620500 7572795 597386909 379.3 2068 740 3601154 5838648 2490036 620500 7570267 604957175 379.9 2069 740 3628604 5827668 2509016 620500 7567756 612524932 380.5 2070 740 3655863 5816765 2527864 620500 7565263 620090195 381.1 2071 740 3682934 5805936 2546583 620500 7562788 627652983 381.7 2072 740 3709822 5795181 2565174 620500 7560329 635213311 382.4 2073 740 3736529 5784498 2583641 620500 7557886 642771198 383.0 2074 740 3763058 5773887 2601985 620500 7555460 650326657 383.5 2075 740 3789413 5763345 2620208 620500 7553050 657879707 384,1 2076 740 3815596 5752871 2638312 620500 7550655 665430362 384,7 2077 740 3841611 5742466 2656300 620500 7548276 672978638 385,3 152

Hogarth Groundwater Calcuiations m3/year ni3/day gpm MAX -1776710 -4868 -744 MIN 2498496 6845 1046 AVERAGE 1031614 2826 432 Model 2A - ITogarth Pit Lake/Middle Arm Measured Annual Change in Water Pit Lake Watershed Year Runoff Pit Runoff Land Pit Evaporation Gwi - Gwo Accu. Voluni< Water Precipitation Storage Elevation Surface Area Area Elevation m ni/year nrVyear mVyear mVyear mVyear nrVyear mVyear m m nr nr 1979 714 43631 2084474 29138 2098967 3249081 148 7 348 7 61074 7294492 1980 697 42550 2032829 33157 2042222 529 3303 373.5 98793 7256773 1981 592 58436 1716953 50898 1724490 7015793 187.8 130429 7225 3 37 1982 833 i 08608 2406549 62593 2452564 9468357 203.0 3 75222 7380344 1983 800 140143 2297136 101471 2335807 118043 64 214.2 217737 7137849 1984 733 159521 2091961 90396 2161086 13965250 222.8 256917 7098649 1985 945 242658 2681869 107314 2837234 3 6782464 232.1 307883 7047683 1986 664 204526 1872710 166349 1794078 3704966 20487430 232.6 242.2 374712 6980854 1987 699 261849 1951288 206241 2006896 22494325 247.0 430833 6944733 1988 764 313828 2121983 244815 758038 2949034 25443359 242.6 253.2 463822 6891744 1989 643 298367 1773325 237199 378767 2213260 27656620 247.8 257.4 503529 6852037 1990 654 329483 1793443 257505 2320010 4185430 31842050 256,3 264.6 578488 6777078 1991 830 479980 2249217 295839 -1776710 656648 32498698 257.5 265.6 590235 6765331 1992 872 514475 2358788 301846 2571418 35070115 269.5 636198 6719368 1993 711 452168 1910277 325352 2118779 4155872 39225988 267.9 275.2 710376 6645190 1994 765 543332 2033032 363286 2213078 41439066 278.0 749827 6605739 1995 795 596113 2100625 383462 2313276 43752342 280.7 793 031 6564535 1996 i 010 799099 2652597 404533 2498496 5545660 49298002 281.6 286.8 889677 6465889 1997 578 514055 1494396 454981 1553471 50851472 288.4 917278 6438288 1998 676 619622 1739625 469096 1890151 52741623 290.2 950845 6404721 1999 813 773417 2083840 486262 1717636 4088611 56830234 289.5 294.0 1023392 6332374 2000 775 793231 1963227 523363 -325867 1907229 58737463 291.4 295 7 1057205 6298361 2003 842 1004141 2076581 609662 172406 2643466 69001057 300.2 303.8 1238896 6116670 2004 868 1075609 2124197 633571 1031614 3597849 72598906 306.4 1302486 6053080 2005 905 1178750 2191215 666093 1031614 3735487 76334393 309.0 1368458 5987108 2006 740 1012111 1771226 699829 1031614 3115122 79449515 311.0 1423436 5932130 2007 740 1052773 1754961 727945 1031614 3111403 82560918 306.9 313.0 1478315 5877251 2008 740 1093362 1738726 756010 1031614 3107691 85668609 309.3 314.8 1533098 5822468 2009 740 1133879 1722519 784026 1031614 3103986 88772595 311.2 316.6 1587785 5767781 2010 740 1174326 1706340 811993 1031614 3100287 91872881 312.8 318.4 1642378 5713188 2011 740 1214703 1690190 839912 1031614 3096594 94969475 313.7 320.1 1696878 5658688 2012 740 1255011 1674066 867783 1031614 3092907 98062382 321.7 1751286 5604280 2013 740 1295251 1657970 895607 1031634 3089227 101351630 323.3 1805603 5549963 2014 740 1335424 1641901 923385 1031614 3085553 304237363 324.8 1859830 5495736 2015 740 1375530 1625859 951117 1031614 3081885 3073 39048 326.3 1913968 5441598 2016 740 1415571 1609842 978803 1031614 3078223 110397272 327.7 1968019 5387547 2017 740 1455547 1593852 1006445 1031614 3074567 113471839 329.1 2021982 5333584 2018 740 1495458 1577887 1034042 1031614 3070917 116542757 330.5 2075859 5279707 2019 740 1535306 1561948 1061595 1031614 3067273 119610030 331.8 2129651 522593 5 2020 740 1 575090 1546035 1089104 1031614 3063635 122673664 333.1 2183358 5172208 2021 740 1614811 1530146 1116569 1031614 3060002 125733666 334.3 2236981 5118585 2022 740 1654471 1514282 1143992 1031614 3056375 128790041 335 5 2290520 5065046 2023 740 1694069 1498443 3171372 1033614 3052754 131842795 336.7 2343976 5011590 2024 740 1733605 1482629 1198710 1031614 3049138 134891933 337.9 2397351 4958215 2025 740 1773081 1466838 1226005 3033614 3045527 137937460 339.0 2450644 4904922 2026 740 1812496 1451072 1253259 1031614 3041923 140979383 340.1 2503856 4851710 2027 740 1851852 1435330 1280472 1031634 3038323 3 44017706 343.2 2556987 4798579 2028 740 1891148 1419612 3 307643 1031634 3034730 147052436 342.3 2610039 4745527 2029 740 1930385 1403917 1334774 1031614 3031141 150083577 343.3 2663011 4692555 2030 740 1969563 1388245 1361864 1031614 3027558 153111135 344.3 2715905 4639661 2008683 1372597 1388914 1031614 3023980 156135116 345.3 2047745 1356973 1415923 1031614 3020408 159155524 346.3 2086749 1341371 1442893 1031614 3016841 162172365 347.2 2125696 1325792 1469823 1031614 3013279 165185644 348.2 2164586 1310236 1496714 1031614 3009722 168195366 349.1 / 40 2203420 1294703 1523565 1031614 3006171 171201537 350.0 740 2242197 1279192 1550378 1031614 3002625 174204162 350.9 740 2280918 1263704 1577152 1031614 2999083 177203245 351.7 740 23!9583 1248238 1603887 1031614 2995547 180198792 352.6 740 2358192 1232794 1630583 1031614 2992016 183190808 353.4 740 2396746 1217372 1657242 1031614 2988490 186179298 354.2 740 2435246 1201972 1683862 1031614 2984969 189164268 355.0 740 2473690 1186595 1710445 1031614 2981453 192145721 355.8 740 2512080 1 171239 1736990 1031614 2977942 195123663 356.6 740 2550416 1155904 1763497 1031614 2974436 198098100 357.4 740 2588698 1140592 1789967 1031614 2970935 201069035 358.1 740 2626925 1125300 1816400 1031614 2967439 204036474 358.9 740 2665100 1110031 1842796 1031614 2963948 207000422 359.6 740 2703221 1094782 1869155 1031614 2960462 209960884 360.3 740 2741289 1079555 1895477 1031614 2956980 212917864 361.0 740 2779303 1064349 1921763 1031614 2953504 215871368 361.7 740 2817266 1049164 1948012 1031614 2950032 218821399 362.4 740 2855175 1034001 1974225 1031614 2946565 221767964 363.1 740 2893033 1018858 2000401 1031614 2943102 224711067 363.8 740 2930838 1003735 2026542 1031614 2939645 227650712 364.4 740 2968591 988634 2052647 1031614 2936192 230586904 365.1 740 3006293 973554 2078716 1031614 2932744 233519648 365.7 740 3043943 958494 2104749 1031614 2929301 236448949 366.4 740 3081541 943454 2130747 1031614 2925862 239374811 367.0 740 3119089 928435 2156709 1031614 2922429 242297240 367.6 740 3156585 913437 2182636 1031614 2918999 245216239 368.2 740 3194030 898459 2208528 1031614 2915575 248131814 368.8 740 3231425 883501 2234384 1031614 2912155 251043969 369,4 740 3268769 868563 2260206 1031614 2908740 253952708 370.0 740 3306063 853645 2285993 3137859 5011574 258964283 371,0 740 3370303 8107059 2330412 3137859 12284809 271249092 373.3 740 3527693 8044103 2439240 3137859 12270415 283519507 375.6 740 3684791 7981264 2547866 3137859 12256048 295775554 377.7 740 3841601 7918540 2656294 3137859 12241707 308017261 379.8 740 3998129 7855929 2764526 3137859 12227391 320244652 381.8 740 4154380 7793428 2872566 3137859 12213101 332457753 383.7 740 4310357 7731038 2980417 3137859 12198837 344656590 385.5 740 4466065 7668754 3088082 3137859 12184596 356841186 387.3 740 4621508 7606577 3195564 3137859 12170380 369011567 389.0 740 4776688 7544505 3302864 3137859 12156188 381167755 390.6 740 4931610 7482537 3409985 3137859 12142020 393309775 392.2 740 5086276 7420670 3516930 3137859 12127875 405437650 393 7 740 5240689 7358905 3623700 3137859 12113753 417551403 395.2 154

Caland G roundwater Calculations m3/year m3/day gpm MAX -1182958 " -3241 -495 M1N 5552848 15213 2324 AVERAGE 2106246 577! 881

Model 2A Caland Pit Lale and Faireweather Late/East and Southeast Arms Measured Annual Change in Water Pit Lake Watershed Year Runoff Pit Runoff Land Pit Exaporation G\vi-G\vo Accu. Volume Water Precipitation Storage Ele vation Surface Are; Area Elevation mmAear mVvear mVvear mVvear mVvear mVvear mVvear m nr nr 1982 833 34108 5593733 19657 2106246 7714429 4480878 132.1 40961 16793962 1983 800 i38756 5330326 100467 2106246 7474861 11955739 181.7 173488 16661435 1984 733 220116 4845933 124733 2106246 704756! 19003300 205.1 300417 16534506 1985 945 421629 6191582 186463 2106246 8532994 27536293 223.8 446405 16388518 1986 664 344226 4335685 279972 4399940 31936233 231.3 231.3 518178 16316745 1987 699 362103 4560857 285205 4637754 36573987 238 2 591424 16243499 1988 764 451778 4963248 352429 657618.2736 5720215 42294202 238.3 245.5 678623 16156300 1989 643 436544 4157203 347048 1832437 6079136 48373338 244.4 252.3 767829 16067094 1990 654 502426 4205379 392668 4134976 8450113 56823452 252.1 260.4 886534 15948389 1991 830 735570 5293046 453373 -1182958 4392286 61215738 255.7 264.2 946042 15888881 1992 872 824613 5539789 483806 5880596 67096333 268.8 1023582 15811341 1993 711 727496 4495071 523460 3651379.35 8350487 75446820 264.9 274.8 112986! 15705062 1994 765 864175 4804814 577811 5091178 80537998 278.0 1192641 15642282 1995 795 948150 4974246 609917 5312479 85850477 281.3 1256651 15578272 1996 1010 1269469 6294868 642652 5552847.683 12474533 98325011 280.1 288.1 1401479 15433444 1997 578 809775 3566978 716716 3660036 101985046 290.0 1442631 15392292 1998 676 974497 4158997 737762 4395733 106380779 292.1 1491311 15343612 1999 813 1213032 4992198 762656 3499152.796 8941726 115322506 288.9 296 2 1587973 15246950 2000 775 1230838 4727164 812089 -436292 4709621 120032127 291.4 298.2 1637688 15197235 2001 941 !541065 5720239 837514 2176092 8599882 128632009 295.6 301.7 1726486 15108437 2002 732 1263442 4422542 882925 4244185 9047244 137679253 299.9 305.1 1817321 15017602 2003 842 1530730 5059730 929378 -960738 4700344 142379597 302.0 306.8 1863536 14971387 2006 740 1492810 4383320 1032211 2106246 6950164 165561986 314.4 2082629 14752294 2007 740 1540312 4364319 1065056 2106246 6945820 172507806 310.9 316.5 2145660 14689263 2008 740 1586930 4345672 1097290 2106246 6941557 179449363 313.6 318.5 2207555 14627368 2009 740 1632707 4327361 1128943 2106246 6937370 186386733 316.1 320.4 2268369 14566554 2010 740 1677686 4309369 1160044 2106246 6933257 193319990 317.9 322.3 2328152 14506771 2011 740 5721901 4291683 1190617 2106246 6929213 200249203 318.9 324.1 2386952 1444797! 2012 740 1765390 4274288 1220687 2106246 6925236 207174438 325.8 2444811 14390112 2013 740 1808182 4257171 1250276 2106246 6921322 214095760 327.4 2501769 14333154 2014 740 1850308 4240320 1279405 2106246 6917469 221013230 329.0 2557864 22047023 20 i 5 740 1891796 6522391 1308092 2106246 9212341 230225571 331.1 2631334 21973553 2016 740 1946135 6500656 1345664 2106246 9207372 239432943 333.1 2703423 21901464 2017 740 1999451 6479329 1382530 2106246 9202496 248635439 335.0 2774197 21830690 2018 740 2051796 6458391 1418724 2106246 9197709 257833147 336.8 2843721 21761166 2019 740 2103216 6437823 1454279 2106246 9193006 267026153 338.6 2912054 21692833 2020 740 2153755 6417608 1489224 2106246 9188384 276214537 340.3 2979249 21625638 202! 740 2203452 6397729 1523588 2106246 9183839 285398376 341.9 3045356 2155953! 2022 740 2252345 6378172 1557395 2106246 9179367 294577744 343.5 3110421 21494466 2023 740 2300467 6358923 1590669 2106246 9174966 303752710 345.1 3i74488 21430399 2024 740 2347852 6339969 1623433 2106246 9170633 312923343 346 6 3237598 21367289 2025 740 2394527 6321299 1655708 2106246 9166364 322089707 348.1 3299787 21305100 2026 740 2440523 630290! 1687511 2106246 9162158 331251865 349.5 3361092 21243795 2027 740 2485863 6284764 1718862 2106246 9158011 340409876 350.8 3421544 21183343 2028 740 2530574 6266880 1749778 2106246 9153922 349563798 352.2 3481176 21123711 2029 740 2574678 6249239 1780273 2106246 9149889 358713686 353.5 3540016 21064871 2030 740 2618196 6231831 1810364 2106246 9145909 367859595 354.8 3598093 21006794 2031 740 2661149 6214650 1840065 2106246 9141980 377001575 356.0 3655431 20949456 2032 740 2703557 6197687 1869387 2106246 9138102 386139677 357.2 3712056 20892831 2033 740 2745436 6180935 1898345 2106246 9134272 395273949 358.4 3767990 20836897 2034 740 2786805 6164388 1926950 2106246 9130488 404404437 359.5 3823256 20781631 2035 740 2827680 6148038 1955213 2106246 9126750 413531188 360.7 3877875 20727012 2036 740 2868076 6131879 1983145 2106246 9123056 422654243 361.8 3931866 20673021 2037 740 2908008 6115907 2010756 2106246 9119404 431773647 362.9 3985248 20619639 2038 740 2947489 6100114 2038056 2106246 9115793 440889440 363.9 4038039 20566848 2039 740 2986534 6084496 2065053 2106246 9112222 450001663 364.9 4090256 20514631 2040 740 3025154 6069048 2091757 2106246 9108690 459110353 366.0 4141916 20462971 2041 740 3063361 6053765 2118176 2106246 9105196 468215549 366.9 4193033 20411854 2042 740 3101167 6038643 2144317 2106246 9101739 477317288 367.9 4243623 20361264 2043 740 3138583 6023676 2170189 2106246 9098317 486415604 368.9 4293699 20311188 2044 740 3175620 6008862 2195798 2106246 9094929 495510534 369.8 4343276 20261611 2045 740 3212287 5994195 2221151 2106246 9091576 504602110 370.7 4392366 20212521 2046 740 3248594 5979672 2246256 2106246 9088256 513690366 371.6 4440981 20163906 2047 740 3284550 5965290 2271118 2106246 9084967 522775333 372.5 4489134 20115753 2048 740 3320163 5951044 2295743 2106246 9081710 531857043 373 4 4536835 20068052 2049 740 3355443 5936932 2320138 2106246 9078484 540935527 374.2 4584097 20020790 2050 740 3390398 5922951 2344307 2106246 9075287 550010814 375.1 4630928 19973959 2051 740 3425035 5909096 2368257 2106246 9072119 559082933 375.9 4677340 19927547 2052 740 3459361 5895365 2391992 2106246 9068980 568151913 376.7 4723342 19881545 2053 740 3493384 5881756 2415517 2106246 9065868 577217782 377.5 4768944 19835943 2054 740 3527111 5868265 2438838 2106246 9062784 586280566 378.3 4814153 19790734 2055 740 3560548 5854891 2461958 2106246 9059726 595340292 379.1 4858980 19745907 2056 740 3593702 5841629 2484883 2106246 9056694 604396985 379.8 4903433 19701454 2057 740 3626579 5828478 2507616 2106246 9053687 613450673 380.6 4947519 19657368 2058 740 3659185 5815436 2530161 2106246 9050705 622501378 381.3 4991246 19613641 2059 740 3691525 5802500 2552523 2106246 9047747 631549125 382.1 5034622 19570265 2060 740 3723606 5789667 2574706 2106246 9044813 640593939 382.8 5077654 19527233 2061 740 3755433 5776937 2596712 2106246 9041903 649635841 383.5 5120349 19484538 2062 740 3787010 5764306 2618546 2106246 9039015 658674856 384.2 5162714 19442173 2063 740 3818343 5751772 2640212 2106246 9036149 667711005 384.9 5204755 19400132 2064 740 3849437 5739335 2661712 2106246 9033306 676744311 385.6 5246479 19358408 155

Hogarth Groundwater Calculations Function m3/year m3/day gpm MAX 2263000 6200 947 MiN -1788500 -4900 -749 AVERAGE 322295 883 135 Model 2B - Hogarth Pit Late/Middle Arm Measured Pit Lake Annual Runoff Change in Water Watershed Year Runoff Pit Pit Evaporation Gwt - Gwo Accu. Volume Water Surface Precipitation Land Storage Elevation Area Elevation Area mm/year mVyear mVyear mVyear mVyear mVyear mVyear m m trr m: 1979 714 43631 2084474 29138 2098967 3249081 148.7 148.7 61074 7294492 1980 697 42550 2032829 33157 2042222 5291303 173.5 98793 7256773 1981 592 58436 1716953 50898 1724490 7015793 187.8 130429 7225137 1982 833 108608 2406549 62593 2452564 9468357 203.0 175222 7180344 1983 800 140143 2297136 101471 2335807 i1804164 214.2 217717 7137849 1984 733 159521 2091961 90396 2161086 13965250 222.8 256917 7098649 1985 945 242658 2681869 107314 2817214 16782464 232.1 307883 7047683 1986 664 204526 1872710 166349 1910888 18693352 232.6 237.6 342376 7013190 1987 699 239252 1960327 188444 2011135 20704487 242.7 378621 6976945 1988 764 289222 2131826 225620 2195427 22899914 242.6 247.9 418127 6937439 1989 643 268972 1785084 213830 378767 2218992 25118907 247.8 252.6 457997 6897569 1990 654 299689 1805360 234220 2320010 4190839 29309746 256.3 260.4 533155 6822411 1991 830 442367 2264262 272656 -1776710 657263 29967009 257.5 261.5 544927 6810639 1992 872 474983 2374585 278676 2570893 32537902 265.7 590936 6764630 1993 711 419999 1923145 302204 2040939 34578841 267.9 268.8 627421 6728145 1994 765 479883 2058412 320863 2217432 36796273 271.9 667023 6688543 1995 795 530284 2126957 341116 2316124 39112397 275.0 708350 6647216 1996 1010 715575 2686007 362250 3039332 42151729 281.6 278.8 762525 6593041 1997 578 440587 1523784 389955 1574415 43726145 280.7 790564 6565002 1998 676 534026 1773863 404295 1903595 45629740 282.9 824446 6531120 1999 813 670604 2124965 421622 2373948 48003688 289.5 285.4 866669 6488897 2000 775 671755 2011818 443215 -325867 1914491 49918179 291 4 287.4 900697 6454869 2001 941 847556 2429613 460617 1207698 4024250 53942429 295.0 291.4 972160 6383406 2002 732 711427 1868551 497163 1516054 3598869 57541297 298.1 294.6 1036000 6319566 2003 842 872623 2129188 529811 172406 2644406 60185704 300.2 296.9 1082870 6272696 2004 868 940148 2178382 553780 625289 3190039 63375743 299.5 1139369 6216197 2005 905 1031129 2250263 582674 625289 3324008 66699751 302.1 1198195 6157371 2006 740 886185 1821597 612757 625289 2720314 69420065 304.2 1246304 6109262 2007 740 921767 1807364 637360 625289 2717060 72137126 306.9 306.1 1294327 6061239 2008 740 957284 1793157 661919 625289 2713812 74850937 309.3 308.0 1342265 6013301 2009 740 992739 1778975 686434 625289 2710569 77561507 311.2 309.8 1390119 5965447 2010 740 1028132 1764818 710907 625289 2707332 80268839 312.8 3! 1.5 1437890 5917676 2011 740 1063464 1750685 735337 625289 2704101 82972940 313.7 313.2 1485580 5869986 2012 740 1098735 1736577 759726 625289 2700875 85673816 314.8 1533190 5822376 2013 740 1133947 1722492 784073 625289 2697655 88371471 316.4 1580719 5774847 2014 740 1169100 1708431 808380 625289 2694440 91065911 317.9 1628171 5727395 2015 740 1204195 1694393 832646 625289 2691231 93757142 319.4 1675544 5680022 2016 740 1239232 1680378 856873 625289 2688026 96445168 320.8 1722840 5632726 2017 740 1274213 1666386 881060 625289 2684827 99129995 322.2 1770060 5585506 2018 740 1309136 1652416 905209 625289 2681633 101811628 323.6 1817204 5538362 2019 740 1344004 1638469 929318 625289 2678444 104490073 324.9 1864274 5491292 2020 740 1378817 1624544 953390 625289 2675261 107165333 326.2 1911269 5444297 2021 740 1413574 1610641 977423 625289 2672082 109837415 327.4 1958190 5397376 2022 740 1448277 1596760 1001418 625289 2668908 112506323 328.7 2005038 5350528 2023 740 1482926 !582900 1025377 625289 2665739 115172063 329.9 2051814 5303752 2024 740 1517522 1569062 1049298 625289 2662575 117834638 331.0 2098518 5257048 2025 740 1552064 1555245 1073182 625289 2659416 120494054 332.1 2145150 5210416 2026 740 1586553 1541449 1097030 625289 2656262 123150317 333.3 2191712 5163854 2027 740 1620990 1527675 1120841 625289 2653113 125803429 334.3 2238203 5117363 2028 740 1655375 1513921 1144617 625289 2649968 128453397 335.4 2284624 5070942 2029 740 1689708 1500188 1168357 625289 2646828 131100225 336.4 2330975 5024591 2030 740 1723989 1486475 1192061 625289 2643693 133743918 337.4 2377257 4978309 203! 740 1758220 1472783 1215729 625289 2640562 136384481 338.4 2423471 4932095 2032 740 1792399 1459111 1239363 625289 2637437 139021917 339.4 2469616 4885950 2033 740 1826528 1445459 1262962 625289 2634315 141656233 340.4 2515693 4839873 2034 740 1860607 1431828 1286526 625289 2631199 144287431 341.3 2561703 4793863 2035 740 1894636 1418216 1310055 625289 2628086 146915518 342.2 2607646 4747920 2036 740 1928615 1404625 1333550 625289 2624979 149540497 343.1 2653522 4702044 2037 740 1962545 1391053 1357011 625289 2621876 152162372 344.0 2699331 4656235 2038 740 1996425 1377501 1380438 625289 26!8777 154781150 344.9 2745074 4610492 2039 740 2030257 1363968 1403831 625289 2615683 157396833 345.7 2790752 4564814 2040 740 2064040 1350455 1427190 625289 2612594 160009427 346.5 2836363 4519203 2041 740 2097774 1336961 1450516 625289 2609508 162618935 347.4 2881910 4473656 2042 740 2131461 1323486 1473809 625289 2606428 165225363 348.2 2927392 4428174 2043 740 2165099 1310031 1497068 625289 2603351 167828714 349.0 2972809 4382757 2044 740 2198690 1296595 1520295 625289 2600279 170428993 349.7 3018162 4337404 2045 740 2232233 1283178 1543488 625289 2597212 173026205 350.5 306345! 4292115 2046 740 2265728 1269779 1566649 625289 2594148 175620353 351.3 3108676 4246890 2047 740 2299177 1256400 1589777 625289 2591089 178211443 352.0 3153838 4201728 2048 740 2332578 1243039 1612873 625289 2588035 180799477 352.7 3198936 4156630 2049 740 2365933 1229697 1635936 625289 2584984 183384461 353.5 3243972 4111594 2050 740 2399241 1216374 1658967 625289 2581938 185966399 354.2 3288944 4066622 2051 740 2432503 1203069 1681966 625289 2578896 188545295 354.9 3333855 4021711 2052 740 2465719 1 189783 1704933 625289 2575858 191121153 355.6 3378703 3976863 2053 740 2498889 1176515 1727869 625289 2572825 193693978 356.2 3423489 3932077 2054 740 2532012 1 163266 1750772 625289 2569795 196263773 356.9 3468213 3887353 2055 740 2565090 1150035 1773644 625289 2566770 198830543 357.6 3512876 2056 740 2598123 1136821 1796485 625289 2563749 201394292 358.2 3557477 2057 740 263!110 1123627 1819294 625289 2560732 203955025 358,9 3602017 2058 740 2664052 1110450 1842072 625289 2557720 206512744 359.5 3646497 2059 740 2696949 1097291 1864818 625289 2554711 209067455 360.1 3690915 2060 740 2729801 1084150 1887534 625289 2551707 211619162 360.7 3735274 2061 740 2762608 1071027 1910219 625289 2548706 214167868 361.3 3779571 2062 740 2795371 1057922 1932873 625289 2545710 216713578 361.9 3823809 2063 740 2828089 1044835 1955496 625289 2542718 219256295 362.5 3867987 2064 740 2860763 1031765 1978089 625289 2539729 221796025 363.1 3912105 2065 740 2893393 1018713 2000651 625289 2536745 224332770 363.7 3956164 2066 740 2925979 1005679 2023182 625289 2533765 226866535 364.3 4000163 2067 740 2958521 992662 2045684 625289 2530789 229397324 364.8 4044104 2068 740 2991019 979663 2068155 625289 2527817 231925141 365.4 4087985 2069 740 3023474 966681 2090595 625289 2524849 234449990 365.9 4131807 2070 740 3055885 953717 2113006 625289 2521885 236971875 366.5 4175571 2071 740 3088252 940770 2135387 2026390 3920025 240891900 367.3 4243584 2072 740 3138554 8199759 2170169 2026390 11194534 252086434 369.6 4437717 2073 740 3282136 8142326 2269449 2026390 11181403 263267837 371.8 4631492 2074 740 3425452 8085000 2368545 2026390 11168296 274436133 373.9 4824915 2075 740 3568507 8027778 2467461 2026390 11155213 285591346 376.0 5017991 2076 740 3711306 7970658 2566201 2026390 11142153 296733499 377.9 5210727 2077 740 3853853 7913639 2664766 2026390 11129117 307862616 379.8 5403127 2078 740 3996153 7856719 2763159 2026390 11116103 318978719 381.6 5595196 2079 740 4138207 7799898 2861383 2026390 11103111 330081830 383.3 5786940 2080 740 4280020 7743172 2959441 2026390 11090142 341171971 385.0 5978361 2081 740 4421596 7686542 3057334 2026390 11077194 352249165 386.6 6169464 2082 740 4562935 7630006 3155064 2026390 11064268 363313433 388.2 6360253 2083 740 4704043 7573563 3252633 2026390 11051363 374364796 389.7 6550731 2084 740 4844920 7517212 3350044 2026390 11038479 385403274 391.2 6740901 2085 740 4985570 7460952 3447297 2026390 11025616 396428890 392.6 6930767 2086 740 5125995 7404782 3544394 2026390 11012773 407441663 394.0 7120332 2087 740 5266197 7348702 3641338 2026390 10999951 418441614 395.3 7309598 157

Caland Groundwater Calculations Function m 3A-car in 3/dav gpm MAX -1182958 -3241 -495 MiN 5552848 15213 2324 AVERAGE 2106246 5771 881 Model 2B Caland Pit Late and Faireweather Lake/East and Southeast Arms Measured Pit Late Annua! Runoff Change in Water Watershed Year Runoff Pit Pit Evaporation Gwi-Gwo Accu. Volume Water Surface Precipitation Land Storage Elevation Area Elevation Area mm A car mVvear nvTvcar m A ear nrVvear mVvear nrA ear m nr nr 1982 833 63735 5581882 36732 1401100 7009986 6598563 151.7 76541 16758382 1983 800 159335 5322095 1 15368 1401100 6767162 33365726 187.3 199239 16635704 1984 733 229208 4842296 129885 1401100 6342719 19708445 207.0 332826 16522097 1985 945 421629 6191582 186463 1401100 7827849 27536293 223.8 446405 36388518 1986 664 344226 4335685 279972 4399940 31936233 233.3 231.3 518378 16316745 1987 699 362103 4560857 285205 4637754 36573987 238.2 591424 36243499 1988 764 451778 4963248 352429 5062597 41636584 238.3 244.7 668765 16366358 1989 643 430203 4159740 342006 1832437 6080373 47716957 244.4 251.6 758358 36076565 1990 654 496229 4207858 387824 4334976 8451238 56368195 252.1 259.8 877533 15957390 1991 830 728102 5296034 448770 -3 3 82958 4392408 60560603 255.7 263.7 937255 15897668 1992 872 816954 5542852 479312 5880494 66443097 268.3 3015058 15819865 1993 711 721437 4497495 519100 4699832 7U40929 264.9 271.8 1075594 15759329 1994 765 822669 4823416 550059 5094027 76234955 275.3 3139675 15695248 1995 795 906042 4993089 582830 5314301 81549256 278.7 1204941 15629982 1996 1010 1217231 6315763 616207 6936788 88466044 280.3 282.8 1287634 15547289 1997 578 743995 3593289 658496 3678788 92144832 284.8 1330645 15504278 1998 676 898850 43 89256 680492 4407615 96552447 287.2 1381339 15453584 1999 813 1123581 5027978 706417 5445 342 101997589 288.9 290.0 1442771 15392352 2000 775 1118292 4772383 737833 -436292 4716350 106713939 291.4 292.3 1494968 15339955 2001 943 1406765 5773959 764527 2376092 8592289 315306228 295.6 296.2 1587800 152473 23 2002 732 1161952 4463138 812001 4244185 9057274 124363502 299.9 300.0 1682723 15152200 2003 842 1417357 5105079 860544 -960738 4701154 129064656 302.0 301.9 1730889 15104034 2004 868 1502757 5245329 885176 1401300 7264010 136328667 304.6 1803921 15031002 2005 905 1632549 544 3223 922525 1401100 7552346 143881013 307.4 1878163 34956760 2006 740 1389089 4424808 960492 1401100 6254505 350335538 309.5 193843 7 14896506 2007 740 1433653 4406982 991306 1401100 6250429 156385948 310.9 311.6 3997578 34837345 2008 740 1477409 4389480 1021562 1401100 6246428 162632376 313.6 313.5 2055703 34779222 2009 740 1520396 4372285 1051285 1401100 6242496 368874872 316.1 315.4 2312832 14722091 2010 740 1562651 4355383 1080502 1401100 6238632 375113504 317.9 317.3 2369019 34665904 2011 740 1604207 4338761 1109236 1401100 6234832 381348336 318.9 319.0 2224303 14610620 2012 740 3 645095 4322406 1137509 1401100 6231092 187579428 320.7 2278723 14556200 2013 740 3685343 4306306 1365339 1401100 6227413 393806839 322.4 2332314 14502609 2014 740 i 724979 4290452 1192745 1401100 6223786 200030625 324.0 2385131 22219776 2015 740 1764028 6573499 1239746 1401100 8518881 208549506 326.3 2456394 22148693 2016 740 1816601 6552469 1256098 1401100 8514073 237063580 328.1 2525935 22078952 2017 740 1868182 6531837 1291763 1403100 8509356 225572935 330.1 2594401 22010486 2018 740 1918819 6511582 1326777 3403100 8504725 234077660 331.9 2661653 2 3943234 20l9 740 1968559 6493686 1361170 1401300 8500176 242577836 333.7 2727750 23877337 2020 740 203 7444 6472132 1394971 1401100 8495705 253073541 335.5 2792742 21832345 2021 740 2065512 6452905 1428208 1401300 8491309 259564850 337.2 2856680 21748207 2022 740 23 12801 6433990 1460906 1401100 8486984 268051835 338.8 2919609 21685278 2023 740 2159343 6415373 1493088 1401100 8482728 276534562 340.4 2981570 23623317 2024 740 2205169 6397042 1524775 1401100 8478537 285013099 341.9 3042603 21562284 2025 740 2250309 6378986 1555987 1401100 8474408 293487508 343.4 3102745 23502342 2026 740 2294790 6361194 1586744 1401100 8470340 303957848 344.8 3162029 21442858 2027 740 2338637 6343655 163 7062 1401100 8466330 310424179 346.2 3220489 21384398 2028 740 2381874 6326360 1646958 1403100 8462376 318886555 347.5 3278155 21326732 2029 740 2424523 6309301 1676448 1401100 8458476 327345031 348.9 3335054 21269833 2030 740 2466606 6292468 1705546 3401100 8454627 335799658 350.2 3393213 21213674 2031 740 2508341 6275853 1734266 3401300 8450828 344250486 351.4 3446658 23 358229 2032 740 2549349 6259450 3 762623 3401100 8447078 352697564 352.6 3501413 23 303474 2033 740 2589645 6243252 3 790623 1401100 8443375 361140939 353.8 3555500 21049387 2034 740 2629648 6227251 3818283 1401300 8439736 369580655 355.0 3608943 20995946 2035 740 2669173 6213441 1845632 1401!00 8436101 378016756 356.1 3661755 20943132 2036 740 2708234 6395816 1872622 1401100 8432529 386449285 357.3 3713962 20890925 2037 740 2746847 6180371 1899320 1401100 8428998 394878283 358.3 3765583 20839306 2038 740 2785024 6365300 1925738 1401100 8425506 403303789 359.4 3816628 20788259 2039 740 2822778 6349999 1951823 1401100 8422053 413 725843 360.5 3867120 20737767 2040 740 2860122 6135061 1977645 1401100 8418638 420144481 361.5 3917072 20687815 204! 740 2897067 6120283 2003191 1401100 8435259 428559740 362.5 3966501 20638386 2042 740 2933624 6105660 2028468 1401100 8411916 436973656 363.5 4015419 20589468 2043 740 2969804 6091188 2053485 3403100 8408607 445380263 364.4 4063842 20541045 2044 740 3005617 6076863 2078249 3403100 8405332 453785595 365.4 4111781 20493306 2045 740 3041073 6062680 2302765 3401100 8402089 462187685 366.3 4159250 20445637 2046 740 3076181 6048637 2127040 1401100 H39887R 470586563 367.2 4206260 20398627 2047 740 3110950 6034730 2153083 1401300 8395699 478982262 368.3 4252823 20352064 2048 740 3345388 6020955 2174894 i401300 8392549 48737483 3 369.0 4298950 20305937 2049 740 3179504 6007308 2198483 1401100 8389429 495764240 369.8 4344652 20260235 2050 740 3233305 5993788 2221855 1401100 8386338 504350578 370.7 4389938 20214949 2051 740 3246798 5980390 224503 5 1401100 8383275 532533853 371.5 4434819 20170068 2052 740 3279992 5967133 2267967 1401100 8380239 520914092 372.3 4479304 20125583 2053 740 3312894 5953952 2290716 1401100 8377230 529293322 373.1 4523402 20081485 2054 740 3345508 5940906 2333268 1401100 8374247 537665569 373.9 4567322 20037765 2055 740 3377843 5927972 2335626 1401100 8371290 546036859 374.7 4610471 19994416 2056 740 3409905 5915148 2357795 1401100 8368358 554405217 375.5 4653459 1995 3428 2057 740 3441698 5902430 2379779 3401100 8365450 562770667 376.2 4696093 19908794 2058 740 3473230 5889818 2401582 1401100 8362566 573133233 377.0 4738380 19866507 2059 740 3504506 5877307 2423208 1401300 8359706 579492939 377.7 4780328 19824559 2060 740 3535531 5864897 2444660 1401300 8356869 587849808 378.4 4821944 19782943 2061 740 3566310 5852586 2465942 3403100 8354054 596203862 379.2 4863234 39741653 2062 740 3596848 5840371 2487058 1401100 835126) 604555123 379.9 4904206 39700683 2063 740 3627151 5828250 2508011 1401100 8348490 632903612 380.5 4944865 39660022 2064 740 3657222 5816221 2528804 1401100 8345739 621249352 381.2 4985217 39619670 2065 740 3687067 5804283 2549440 1401100 8343030 629592362 383.9 5025269 39579618 2066 740 3716689 5792434 2569923 1401100 8340301 637932663 382.6 5065026 19539861 2067 740 3746093 5780672 2590254 1401100 8337612 646270275 383.2 5104494 39500393 2068 740 3775284 5768996 2630438 1401100 8334942 654605217 383.9 5343679 39461208 2069 740 3804265 5757404 2630477 140)100 8332292 662937508 384.5 5182584 39422303 2070 740 3833039 5745894 2650374 3401300 8329660 673267169 385.1 5223217 39383670 158

Model 3A

100 -

90 - • Caland Measured Water Levels

Joining Elevation (385 in) 80 - Outlet Elevation (394 m) 70 - Expon. (Caland Measured Water Levels)

60 -

50 -

40 -

30 -

20 -

100 150 200 250 300 350 400

Water Elevation (m) 159

Model 3A - Caland Pit I,ale/East Arm

Water Water Water Year Year Year Elevation (m) Elevation (m) Elevation (m)

1979 86.9 2027 346.4 2075 391.9 1980 133.1 2028 347.7 2076 392.6 1981 160.2 2029 349.0 2077 393.3 1982 179.3 2030 350.3 2078 393.9 1983 194.2 2031 351.6 2079 394.6 1984 206.4 2032 352.9 1985 216.6 2033 354.1 1986 225.5 2034 355.3 1987 233.4 2035 356.5 1988 240.4 2036 357.6 1989 246.8 2037 358.8 1990 252.6 2038 359.9 1991 257.9 2039 361.0 1992 262.9 2040 362.1 1993 267.5 2041 363.1 1994 271.8 2042 364.2 1995 275.8 2043 365.2 1996 279.6 2044 366.2 1997 283.2 2045 367.2 1998 286.6 2046 368.2 1999 289.9 2047 369.2 2000 293.0 2048 370.2 2001 296.0 2049 371.1 2002 298.8 2050 372.0 2003 301.5 2051 373.0 2004 304.1 2052 373.9 2005 306.6 2053 374.8 2006 309.1 2054 375.6 2007 311.4 2055 376.5 2008 313.7 2056 377.4 2009 315.9 2057 378.2 2010 318.0 2058 379.1 2011 320.0 2059 379.9 2012 322.0 2060 380.7 2013 323.9 2061 381.5 2014 325.8 2062 382.3 2015 327.6 2063 383.1 2016 329.4 2064 383.9 2017 331.2 2065 384.6 2018 332.8 2066 385.4 2019 334.5 2067 386.2 2020 336.1 2068 386.9 2021 337.7 2069 387.6 2022 339.2 2070 388.4 2023 340.7 2071 389.1 2024 342.2 2072 389.8 2025 343.6 2073 390.5 2026 345.0 2074 391.2 160

Model 3B

200 -

80 - A Hogarth Measured Water Elevations

Joining Elevation (385 m) 160 - Outlet Elevation (394 m)

140 - Expon. (Hogarth Measured Water Elevations)

120 -

100 -

80 -

60 -

40 -

20 -

145 195 245 295 345 395 Water 0evation (m) 161

Model 3B - Hogarth Pit Late/Middle Arm

Water Water Water Water Year Year Year Year Elevation (m) Elevation (m) Elevation (m) Elevation (m)

1979 136.1 2027 330.7 2075 364.9 2123 385.0 1980 170.8 2028 331.7 2076 365.4 2124 385.3 1981 191.1 2029 332.7 2077 365.9 2125 385.7 1982 205.4 2030 333.7 2078 366.4 2126 386.0 1983 216.6 2031 334.6 2079 366.9 2127 386.3 1984 225.7 2032 335.6 2080 367.4 2128 386.7 1985 233.4 2033 336.5 2081 367.9 2129 387.0 1986 240.1 2034 337.4 2082 368.4 2130 387.3 1987 246.0 2035 338.3 2083 368.8 2131 387.7 1988 251.3 2036 339.2 2084 369.3 2132 388.0 1989 256.0 2037 340.0 2085 369.8 2133 388.3 1990 260.4 2038 340.9 2086 370.2 2134 388.6 1991 264.4 2039 341.7 2087 370.7 2135 388.9 1992 268.1 2040 342.5 2088 371.2 2136 389.3 1993 271.5 2041 343.3 2089 371.6 2137 389.6 1994 274.8 2042 344.1 2090 372.1 2138 389.9 1995 277.8 2043 344.9 2091 372.5 2139 390.2 1996 280.7 2044 345.6 2092 372.9 2140 390.5 1997 283.4 2045 346.4 2093 373.4 2141 390.8 1998 285.9 2046 347.1 2094 373.8 2142 391.1 1999 288.4 2047 347.8 2095 374.2 2143 391.4 2000 290.7 2048 348.6 2096 374.7 2144 391.7 2001 292.9 2049 349.3 2097 375.1 2145 392.0 2002 295.0 2050 350.0 2098 375.5 2146 392.3 2003 297.1 2051 350.7 2099 375.9 2147 392.6 2004 299.0 2052 351.3 2100 376.3 2148 392.9 2005 300.9 2053 352.0 2101 376.7 2149 393.2 2006 302.7 2054 352.7 2102 377.1 2150 393.5 2007 304.5 2055 353.3 2103 377.5 2151 393.8 2008 306.2 2056 354.0 2104 377.9 2152 394.1 2009 307.8 2057 354.6 2105 378.3 2010 309.4 2058 355.2 2106 378.7 2011 311.0 2059 355.9 2107 379.1 2012 312.5 2060 356.5 2108 379.5 2013 313.9 2061 357.1 2109 379.9 2014 315.3 2062 357.7 2110 380.3 2015 316.7 2063 358.3 2111 380.7 2016 318.0 2064 358.9 2112 381.0 2017 319.3 2065 359.4 2113 381.4 2018 320.6 2066 360.0 2114 381.8 2019 321.8 2067 360.6 2115 382.1 2020 323.0 2068 361.1 2116 382.5 2021 324.2 2069 361.7 2117 382.9 2022 325.3 2070 362.2 2118 383.2 2023 326.5 2071 362.8 2119 383.6 2024 327.6 2072 363.3 2120 383.9 2025 328.6 2073 363.8 2121 384.3 2026 329.7 2074 364.4 2122 384.6 162

APPENDIX V Sensitivity Analysis: Water Balance & Rebound Model Results Sensitivity Analysis - Summary of Evaporation Results Model 2B Evaporation Rate = 511.4 mm/year Evaporation Rate Variations (mm/year) plus 5% 536.97 minus 5% 485.83 plus 10% 562.54 minus 10% 460.26 plus 20% 613.68 minus 20% 409.12 plus 30% 664.82 minus 30% 357.98 plus 40% 715.96 minus 40% 306.84 Difference Rebound Rates Join Outflow Relative to ModeI2b Rebound Rate 2070 2087 Model 2B minus 40% 2065 2078 9 minus 30% 2066 2080 7 minus 20% 2067 2082 5 minus 10% 2069 2085 2 minus 5% 2070 2086 1 plus 5% 2071 2088 -1 plus 10% 2072 2089 -2 plus 20% 2073 2091 -4 plus 30% 2075 2094 -7 plus 40% 2077 2097 -10

Sensitivity Analysis - Summary of Precipitation Results Model 2B Precipitation Rate 739.6 mm/year Precipitation Rate Variations (mm/year) plus 5% 776.58 minus 5% 702.62 plus 10% 813.56 minus 10% 665.64 plus 20% 887.52 minus 20% 591.68 plus 30% 961.48 minus 30% 517.72 plus 40% 1035.44 Rebound Rates Join Outflow Difference Relative to Model2b Rebound Rate 2070 2087 Model 2B minus 30% 2099 2186 99 minus 20% 2087 2109 22 minus 10% 2078 2096 9 minus 5% 2074 2091 4 plus 5% 2067 2083 -4 plus 10% 2064 2079 -8 plus 20% 2059 2072 -15 plus 30% 2055 2067 -20 plus 40% 2052 2063 -24 Sensitivity Analysis - Summary of Net Groundwater Influx Results Caland (ni'/veart Hoparth

Sensitivity Analysis - Summary of Runoff Results Model 2B Rentention Factor = 40% Rebound Rates Join Outflow Difference Relative to Model2b Rebound Rate 2070 2087 Model 2B 20% 2095 2131 44 30% 2084 2103 16 35% 2077 2094 7 45% 2065 2080 -7 50% 2060 2075 -12 60% 2053 2066 -21 APPENDIX VI Rebound Model - Pit Geometry Modeled Using Linear Interpolation 166 Pit Geometry Model

Hogarth & South Roberts Caland & Fairew eather Lake

Elevation Surface Volume Elevation Accu. Vol. Elevation Elevation Surface Volume Elevation Accu. Vol. Elevation (masl) Area (m2) (m?) (masl) (m3) (masl) (masl) Area (m2) (nnP) (mas!) (m3) (masl) 107 11148 107 107 91 7989 91 91 108 13483 12316 108 12316 108 92 8784 8387 92 8387 92 109 15251 14367 109 26683 109 93 9578 9181 93 17567 93 110 17019 16135 110 42818 110 94 10371 9975 94 27542 94 111 18787 17903 111 60721 111 95 11165 10768 95 38310 95 112 20555 19671 112 80392 112 96 11959 11562 96 49872 96 113 22322 21439 113 101830 113 97 12753 12356 97 62229 97 114 24090 23206 114 125037 114 98 13547 13150 98 75379 98 115 25858 24974 115 150011 115 99 14341 13944 99 89323 99 116 27626 26742 116 176753 116 100 15135 14738 100 104061 100 117 29394 28510 117 205262 117 101 15929 15532 101 119593 101 118 31161 30278 118 235540 118 102 16723 16326 102 135919 102 119 32929 32045 119 267585 119 103 17517 17120 103 153039 103 120 34697 33813 120 301398 120 104 18311 17914 104 170952 104 121 36465 35581 121 336979 121 105 19105 18708 105 189660 105 122 38233 37349 122 374328 122 106 19899 19502 106 209162 106 123 40000 39117 123 413444 123 107 20438 20168 107 229330 107 124 41768 40884 124 454329 124 108 23781 22110 108 251440 108 125 43536 42652 125 496981 125 109 26311 25046 109 276486 109 126 45304 44420 126 541401 126 110 28841 27576 110 304062 110 127 47072 46188 127 587588 127 111 31371 30106 111 334168 111 128 48839 47956 128 635544 128 112 33901 32636 112 366804 112 129 50607 49723 129 685267 129 113 36430 35166 113 401969 113 130 52375 51491 130 736758 130 114 38960 37695 114 439664 114 131 54143 53259 131 790017 131 115 41490 40225 115 479890 115 132 55911 55027 132 845044 132 116 44020 42755 116 522644 116 133 57678 56795 133 901838 133 117 46550 45285 117 567929 117 134 59446 58562 134 960401 134 118 49079 47815 118 615744 118 135 61214 60330 135 1020731 135 119 51609 50344 119 666088 119 136 62982 62098 136 1082829 136 120 54139 52874 120 718962 120 137 65030 64006 137 1146834 137 121 56669 55404 121 774366 121 138 66746 65888 138 1212722 138 122 59199 57934 122 832300 122 139 68788 67767 139 1280489 139 123 61728 60464 123 892763 123 140 70830 69809 140 1350298 140 124 64258 62993 124 955756 124 141 72872 71851 141 1422149 141 125 66788 65523 125 1021280 125 142 74914 73893 142 1496042 142 126 69318 68053 126 1089332 126 143 76956 75935 143 1571978 143 127 71848 70583 127 1159915 127 144 78998 77977 144 1649955 144 128 74377 73113 128 1233028 128 145 81041 80019 145 1729974 145 129 76907 75642 129 1308670 129 146 83083 82062 146 1812036 146 130 79437 78172 130 1386842 130 147 85125 84104 147 1896140 147 131 81967 80702 131 1467544 131 148 87167 86146 148 1982285 148 132 84497 83232 132 1550776 132 149 89209 88188 149 2070473 149 133 87026 85762 133 1636537 133 150 91251 90230 150 2160703 150 134 89556 88291 134 1724828 134 151 93293 92272 151 2252975 151 135 92086 90821 135 1815650 135 152 95335 94314 152 2347289 152 136 94616 93351 136 1909000 136 153 97377 96356 153 2443646 153 137 97545 96080 137 2005081 137 154 99419 98398 154 2542044 154 138 101636 99590 138 2104671 138 155 101462 100440 155 2642484 155 139 106512 104074 139 2208745 139 156 103504 102483 156 2744967 156 140 111389 108951 140 2317696 140 157 105546 104525 157 2849492 157 141 116266 113827 141 2431523 141 158 107588 106567 158 2956058 158 142 121142 118704 142 2550227 142 159 109630 108609 159 3064667 159 143 126019 123581 143 2673808 143 160 111672 110651 160 3175318 160 144 130895 128457 144 2802265 144 161 113714 112693 161 3288011 161 145 135772 133334 145 2935599 145 162 115756 114735 162 3402746 162 146 140649 138210 146 3073809 146 163 117798 116777 163 3519524 163 147 145525 143087 147 3216896 147 164 119840 118819 164 3638343 164 148 150402 147964 148 3364859 148 165 121883 120861 165 3759204 165 149 155278 152840 149 3517699 149 166 123925 122904 166 3882108 166 150 160155 157717 150 3675416 150 167 125967 124946 167 4007054 167 151 165032 162593 151 3838009 151 168 127273 126620 168 4133673 168 152 169908 167470 152 4005479 152 169 130929 129101 169 4262774 169 153 174785 172347 153 4177826 153 170 133611 132270 170 4395044 170 154 179661 177223 154 4355049 154 171 136293 134952 171 4529996 171 155 184538 182100 155 4537149 155 172 138975 137634 172 4667631 172 156 189415 186976 156 4724125 156 173 141658 140317 173 4807947 173 157 194291 191853 157 4915978 157 174 144340 142999 174 4950946 174 158 199168 196730 158 5112707 158 175 147022 145681 175 5096627 175 159 204044 201606 159 5314313 159 176 149704 148363 176 5244990 176 160 208921 206483 160 5520796 160 177 152386 151045 177 5396035 177 161 213798 211359 161 5732155 161 178 155069 153728 178 5549763 178 162 218674 216236 162 5948391 162 179 157751 156410 179 5706172 179 163 223551 221113 163 6169504 163 180 160433 159092 180 5865264 180 164 228427 225989 164 6395493 164 181 163115 161774 181 6027038 181 165 233304 230866 165 6626359 165 182 165797 164456 182 6191495 182 166 238181 235742 166 6862101 166 183 168480 167139 183 6358633 183 167 243057 240619 167 7102720 167 184 171162 169821 184 6528454 184 168 246185 244621 168 7347341 168 185 173844 172503 185 6700957 185 169 255730 250958 169 7598298 169 186 176526 175185 186 6876142 186 170 262746 259238 170 7857537 170 187 179208 177867 187 7054009 187 171 269762 266254 171 8123790 171 188 181891 180550 188 7234559 188 172 276778 273270 172 8397060 172 189 184573 183232 189 7417790 189 173 283793 280286 173 8677346 173 190 187255 185914 190 7603704 190 174 290809 287301 174 8964647 174 191 189937 188596 191 7792300 191 175 297825 294317 175 9258964 175 192 192619 191278 192 7983579 192 176 304841 301333 176 9560297 176 193 195302 193961 193 8177539 193 177 311857 308349 177 9868646 177 194 197984 196643 194 8374182 194 178 318872 315365 178 10184010 178 195 200666 199325 195 8573507 195 179 325888 322380 179 10506390 179 196 203348 202007 196 8775514 196 180 332904 329396 180 10835787 180 197 206030 204689 197 8980203 197 181 339920 336412 181 11172198 181 198 209386 207708 198 9187911 198 182 346936 343428 182 11515626 182 199 206333 207860 199 9395771 199 183 353951 350444 183 11866070 183 200 203285 204809 200 9600580 200 184 360967 357459 184 12223529 184 201 205704 204495 201 9805075 201 185 367983 364475 185 12588004 185 202 208124 206914 202 10011989 202 186 374999 371491 186 12959495 186 203 210545 209335 203 10221323 203 187 382015 378507 187 13338002 187 204 212966 211755 204 10433079 204 188 389030 385523 188 13723524 188 205 215387 214176 205 10647255 205 189 396046 392538 189 14116062 189 206 217807 216597 206 10863852 206 190 403058 399552 190 14515614 190 207 220228 219018 207 11082869 207 191 409562 406310 191 14921924 191 208 222649 221438 208 11304308 208 192 416072 412817 192 15334741 192 209 225069 223859 209 11528167 209 193 422581 419326 193 15754068 193 210 227493 226281 210 11754447 210 194 429090 425836 194 16179903 194 211 230459 228976 211 11983423 211 195 435600 432345 195 16612248 195 212 233429 231944 212 12215368 212 196 442109 438854 196 17051102 196 213 236400 234915 213 12450282 213 197 448618 445363 197 17496466 197 214 239370 237885 214 12688167 214 198 455127 451873 198 17948338 198 215 242340 240855 215 12929022 215 199 461637 458382 199 18406720 199 216 245310 243825 216 13172847 216 200 468151 464894 200 18871614 200 217 248280 246795 217 13419642 217 201 474677 471414 201 19343028 201 218 251251 249766 218 13669408 218 202 481209 477943 202 19820971 202 219 254221 252736 219 13922143 219 203 487741 484475 203 20305446 203 220 257195 255708 220 14177851 220 204 494273 491007 204 20796453 204 221 264104 260649 221 14438500 221 205 500805 497539 205 21293991 205 222 271012 267558 222 14706059 222 206 507336 504070 206 21798062 206 223 277921 274467 223 14980525 223 207 513868 510602 207 22308664 207 284829 281375 224 15261901 224 208 520400 517134 208 22825798 208 291738 288284 225 15550184 225 209 526932 523666 209 23349464 209 298646 295192 226 15845376 226 210 533470 530201 210 23879666 210 305555 302100 227 16147476 227 211 539644 536557 211 24416223 211 312463 309009 228 16456485 228 212 545813 542728 212 24958951 212 319371 315917 229 16772402 229 213 551981 548897 213 25507848 213 326279 322825 230 17095227 230 214 558149 555065 214 26062913 214 231 332018 329148 231 17424375 231 215 564318 561233 215 26624147 215 232 337766 334892 232 17759267 232 216 570486 567402 216 27191548 216 233 343515 340641 233 18099908 233 217 576654 573570 217 27765118 217 234 349263 346389 234 18446297 234 218 582822 579738 218 28344856 218 235 355012 352138 235 18798435 235 219 588991 585907 219 28930763 219 236 360761 357886 236 19156321 236 220 595153 592072 220 29522835 220 237 366509 363635 237 19519956 237 221 605634 600394 221 30123229 221 238 372258 369384 238 19889339 238 222 616114 610874 222 30734103 222 239 378006 375132 239 20264471 239 223 626594 621354 223 31355457 223 240 383755 380881 240 20645352 240 224 637074 631834 224 31987291 224 241 389711 386733 241 21032085 241 225 647554 642314 225 32629604 225 242 395656 392684 242 21424769 242 226 658034 652794 226 33282398 226 243 401602 398629 243 21823398 243 227 668514 663274 227 33945672 227 244 407547 404574 244 22227972 244 228 678994 673754 228 34619426 228 245 413492 410520 245 22638492 245 229 689474 684234 229 35303659 229 246 419438 416465 246 23054957 246 230 699952 694713 230 35998372 230 247 425383 422410 247 23477367 247 231 710039 704995 231 36703368 231 248 431328 428356 248 23905723 248 232 720176 715107 232 37418475 232 249 437273 434301 249 24340023 249 233 730313 725244 233 38143719 233 250 443218 440246 250 24780269 250 234 740450 735381 234 38879100 234 251 450529 446873 251 25227143 251 235 750587 745518 235 39624618 235 252 457841 454185 252 25681327 252 236 760724 755655 236 40380273 236 253 465153 461497 253 26142824 253 237 770861 765792 237 41146065 237 254 472465 468809 254 26611633 254 238 780998 775929 238 41921994 238 255 479777 476121 255 27087754 255 239 791135 786066 239 42708060 239 256 487089 483433 256 27571186 256 240 801325 796230 240 43504290 240 257 494401 490745 257 28061931 257 241 813820 807572 241 44311862 241 258 501713 498057 258 28559988 258 242 826317 820069 242 45131931 242 259 509024 505369 259 29065356 259 243 838814 832565 243 45964496 243 260 516338 512681 260 29578037 260 244 851310 845062 244 46809558 244 261 524132 520235 261 30098272 261 245 863807 857559 245 47667116 245 262 531927 528029 262 30626301 262 246 876304 870055 246 48537172 246 263 539722 535824 263 31162125 263 247 888800 882552 247 49419724 247 264 547517 543619 264 31705744 264 248 901297 895049 248 50314773 248 265 555312 551414 265 32257158 265 249 913794 907546 249 51222318 249 266 563107 559209 266 32816367 266 250 926292 920043 250 52142361 250 267 570902 567004 267 33383372 267 251 940036 933164 251 53075525 251 268 578697 574799 268 33958171 268 252 953779 946908 252 54022433 252 269 586492 582594 269 34540765 269 253 967523 960651 253 54983084 253 270 594288 590390 270 35131154 270 254 981266 974394 254 55957478 254 271 607256 600772 271 35731926 271 255 995009 988137 255 56945615 255 272 620224 613740 272 36345666 272 256 1008752 1001881 256 57947496 256 273 633192 626708 273 36972375 273 257 1022495 1015624 257 58963120 257 274 646160 639676 274 37612051 274 258 1036239 1029367 258 59992487 258 275 659128 652644 275 38264695 275 259 1049982 1043110 259 61035597 259 276 672096 665612 276 38930306 276 260 1063724 1056853 260 62092450 260 277 685064 678580 277 39608886 277 261 1078552 1071138 261 63163588 261 278 698032 691548 278 40300434 278 262 1093378 1085965 262 64249553 262 279 711000 704516 279 41004950 279 263 1108204 1100791 263 65350344 263 280 723967 717483 280 41722433 280 264 1123031 1115618 264 66465962 264 281 740815 732391 281 42454824 281 265 1137857 1130444 265 67596406 265 282 757663 749239 282 43204063 282 266 1152684 1145271 266 68741676 266 283 774511 766087 283 43970150 283 267 1167510 1160097 267 69901773 267 284 791359 782935 284 44753085 284 268 1182337 1174923 268 71076697 268 285 808207 799783 285 45552868 285 269 1197163 1189750 269 72266447 269 286 825054 816630 286 46369498 286 270 1211989 1204576 270 73471023 270 287 841902 833478 287 47202977 287 271 1232596 1222292 271 74693315 271 288 858750 850326 288 48053303 288 272 1253204 1242900 272 75936215 272 289 875598 867174 289 48920477 289 273 1273813 1263509 273 77199724 273 290 892445 884021 290 49804498 290 274 1294421 1284117 274 78483841 274 291 918541 905493 291 50709991 291 275 1315029 1304725 275 79788566 275 292 944638 931590 292 51641581 292 276 1335638 1325334 276 81113899 276 293 970735 957686 293 52599267 293 277 1356246 1345942 277 82459841 277 294 996831 983783 294 53583050 294 278 1376854 1366550 278 83826391 278 295 1022928 1009880 295 54592930 295 279 1397463 1387159 279 85213550 279 1049025 1035977 296 55628907 296 280 1418072 1407767 280 86621317 280 1075122 1062073 297 56690980 297 281 1437555 1427814 281 88049131 281 1101218 1088170 298 57779150 298 282 1457040 1447297 282 89496428 282 1127315 1114267 299 58893417 299 283 1476524 1466782 283 90963210 283 1153413 1140364 300 60033781 300 284 1496008 1486266 284 92449476 284 301 1180929 1167171 301 61200951 301 285 1515493 1505751 285 93955227 285 302 1208445 1194687 302 62395638 302 286 1534977 1525235 286 95480462 286 303 1235960 1222202 303 63617841 303 287 1554462 1544720 287 97025182 287 304 1263476 1249718 304 64867559 304 288 1573946 1564204 288 98589386 288 305 1290992 1277234 305 66144793 305 289 1593431 1583688 289 100173074 289 306 1318507 1304750 306 67449542 306 290 1612916 1603173 290 101776247 290 307 1346023 1332265 307 68781807 307 291 1660877 1636897 291 103413144 291 308 1373539 1359781 308 70141588 308 292 1708839 1684858 292 105098002 292 309 1401054 1387297 309 71528885 309 293 1756801 1732820 293 106830822 293 310 1428569 1414812 310 72943697 310 294 1804763 1780782 294 108611604 294 311 1451442 1440006 311 74383703 311 295 1852725 1828744 295 110440347 295 312 1474314 1462878 312 75846581 312 296 1900687 1876706 296 112317053 296 313 1497186 1485750 313 77332331 313 297 1948648 1924667 297 114241720 297 314 1520058 1508622 314 78840953 314 298 1996610 1972629 298 116214350 298 315 1542929 1531494 315 80372446 315 299 2044572 2020591 299 118234941 299 316 1565801 1554365 316 81926812 316 300 2092535 2068553 300 120303494 300 317 1588673 1577237 317 83504049 317 301 2125975 2109255 301 122412749 301 318 1611545 1600109 318 85104158 318 302 2159417 2142696 302 124555445 302 319 1634417 1622981 319 86727138 319 303 2192858 2176137 303 126731583 303 320 1657287 1645852 320 88372990 320 304 2226299 2209578 304 128941161 304 321 1680114 1668700 321 90041691 321 305 2259740 2243020 305 131184181 305 322 1702942 1691528 322 91733218 322 306 2293181 2276461 306 133460641 306 323 1725770 1714356 323 93447575 323 307 2326622 2309902 307 135770543 307 324 1748598 1737184 324 95184759 324 308 2360064 2343343 308 138113886 308 325 1771427 1760013 325 96944772 325 309 2393505 2376784 309 140490670 309 326 1794255 1782841 326 98727612 326 310 2426946 2410226 310 142900896 310 327 1817083 1805669 327 100533281 327 311 2466199 2446573 311 145347469 311 328 1839911 1828497 328 102361779 328 312 2505451 2485825 312 147833294 312 329 1862740 1851326 329 104213104 329 313 2544704 2525078 313 150358371 313 330 1885570 1874155 330 106087259 330 314 2583956 2564330 314 152922701 314 331 1909489 1897529 331 107984788 331 315 2623209 2603582 315 155526284 315 332 1933408 1921448 332 109906237 332 316 2662461 2642835 316 158169119 316 333 1957326 1945367 333 111851604 333 317 2701713 2682087 317 160851206 317 334 1981245 1969285 334 113820889 334 318 2740966 2721340 318 163572546 318 335 2005163 1993204 335 115814093 335 319 2780218 2760592 319 166333138 319 336 2029082 2017122 336 117831215 336 320 2819470 2799844 320 169132982 320 337 2053000 2041041 337 119872256 337 321 2860787 2840128 321 171973110 321 338 2076918 2064959 338 121937215 338 322 2902102 2881444 322 174854555 322 339 2100837 2088878 339 124026093 339 323 2943417 2922759 323 177777314 323 340 2124754 2112795 340 126138888 340 324 2984732 2964074 324 180741388 324 341 2145944 2135349 341 128274237 341 325 3026047 3005390 325 183746778 325 342 2167136 2156540 342 130430777 342 326 3067362 3046705 326 186793482 326 343 2188327 2177731 343 132608509 343 327 3108677 3088020 327 189881502 327 344 2209518 2198923 344 134807431 344 328 3149993 3129335 328 193010837 328 345 2230710 2220114 345 137027545 345 329 3191308 3170650 329 196181487 329 346 2251901 2241305 346 139268850 346 330 3232622 3211965 330 199393452 330 347 2273092 2262497 347 141531347 347 331 3289430 3261026 331 202654477 331 348 2294283 2283688 348 143815035 348 332 3346239 3317834 332 205972312 332 349 2315475 2304879 349 146119914 349 333 3403048 3374644 333 209346955 333 350 2336667 2326071 350 148445985 350 334 3459858 3431453 334 212778408 334 351 2359453 2348060 351 150794045 351 335 3516667 3488262 335 216266671 335 352 2382241 2370847 352 153164892 352 336 3573477 3545072 336 219811743 336 353 2405028 2393635 353 155558527 353 337 3630286 3601881 337 223413624 337 354 2427816 2416422 354 157974949 354 338 3687095 3658691 338 227072314 338 355 2450603 2439210 355 160414158 355 339 3743905 3715500 339 230787814 339 356 2473391 2461997 356 162876155 356 340 3800716 3772310 340 234560125 340 357 2496178 2484784 357 165360940 357 341 3882787 3841751 341 238401876 341 358 2518966 2507572 358 167868512 358 342 3964859 3923823 342 242325699 342 359 2541753 2530359 359 170398871 359 343 4046932 4005896 343 246331595 343 360 2564542 2553147 360 172952018 360 344 4129004 4087968 344 250419563 344 361 2586356 2575449 361 175527467 361 345 4211076 4170040 345 254589603 345 362 2608171 2597264 362 178124731 362 346 4293148 4252112 346 258841715 346 363 2629986 2619078 363 180743809 363 347 4375221 4334185 347 263175900 347 364 2651801 2640893 364 183384703 364 348 4457293 4416257 348 267592157 348 365 2673615 2662708 365 186047410 365 349 4539365 4498329 349 272090486 349 366 2695430 2684523 366 188731933 366 350 4621438 4580402 350 276670888 350 367 2717245 2706337 367 191438270 367 351 4671707 4646573 351 281317460 351 368 2739059 2728152 368 194166422 368 352 4721976 4696841 352 286014302 352 369 2760874 2749967 369 196916389 369 353 4772245 4747111 353 290761412 353 370 2782689 2771781 370 199688170 370 354 4822515 4797380 354 295558792 354 371 2805176 2793932 371 202482103 371 355 4872784 4847649 355 300406442 355 372 2827663 2816420 372 205298523 372 356 4923053 4897919 356 305304360 356 373 2850150 2838907 373 208137430 373 357 4973323 4948188 357 310252548 357 374 2872637 2861394 374 210998824 374 358 5023592 4998457 358 315251006 358 375 2895124 2883881 375 213882705 375 359 5073861 5048727 359 320299732 359 376 2917611 2906368 376 216789072 376 360 5124131 5098996 360 325398728 360 377 2940098 2928855 377 219717927 377 361 5168231 5146181 361 330544910 361 378 2962585 2951342 378 222669269 378 362 5212332 5190282 362 335735191 362 379 2985072 2973829 379 225643098 379 363 5256433 5234383 363 340969574 363 380 3007558 2996315 380 228639413 380 364 5300534 5278484 364 346248058 364 381 3932370 3469964 381 232109377 381 365 5344635 5322584 365 351570642 365 382 4857181 4394776 382 236504153 382 366 5388736 5366685 366 356937327 366 383 5781993 5319587 383 241823740 383 367 5432837 5410786 367 362348114 367 384 6706804 6244399 384 248068139 384 368 5476938 5454887 368 367803001 368 385 7631616 7169210 385 255237349 385 369 5521039 5498988 369 373301989 369 386 8556427 8094021 386 263331370 386 370 5565141 5543090 370 378845079 370 387 9481238 9018833 387 272350203 387 371 5698059 5631600 371 384476679 371 388 10406050 9943644 388 282293847 388 372 5830979 5764519 372 390241198 372 389 11330861 10868456 389 293162303 389 373 5963899 5897439 373 396138638 373 390 12255672 11793267 390 304955569 390 374 6096819 6030359 374 402168997 374 391 12539173 12397423 391 317352992 391 375 6229739 6163279 375 408332276 375 392 12822675 12680924 392 330033916 392 376 6362659 6296199 376 414628475 376 393 13106177 12964426 393 342998342 393 377 6495579 6429119 377 421057594 377 394 13389678 13247927 394 356246270 394 378 6628499 6562039 378 427619633 378 395 13673180 13531429 395 369777699 395 379 6761419 6694959 379 434314591 379 396 13956682 13814931 396 383592630 396 380 6894340 6827879 380 441142471 380 397 14240183 14098432 397 397691062 397 381 7430473 7162406 381 448304877 381 398 14523685 14381934 398 412072996 398 382 7966606 7698539 382 456003416 382 399 14807186 14665436 399 426738431 399 383 8502739 8234673 383 464238089 383 400 15090689 14948937 400 441687369 400 384 9038872 8770806 384 473008895 384 385 9575006 9306939 385 482315834 385 386 10111139 9843072 386 492158906 386 387 10647272 10379206 387 502538112 387 388 11183405 10915339 388 513453450 388 389 11719539 11451472 389 524904923 389 390 12255672 11987605 390 536892528 390 391 12538931 12397302 391 549289830 391 392 12822432 12680682 392 561970511 392 393 13105933 12964183 393 574934694 393 394 13389434 13247684 394 588182377 394 395 13672935 13531185 395 601713562 395 396 13956436 13814686 396 615528247 396 397 14239937 14098187 397 629626434 397 398 14523438 14381688 398 644008121 398 399 14806939 14665189 399 658673310 399 400 15090689 14948814 400 673622124 400 171 Rebound Model Results

Hogarth Measured Rt Lake Annual Rt Change in Accu. Water Watershed Year Runoff Rt Runoff Land Gw i - Gw o Year Water Surface Precipitation Evaporation Storage Volume Elevation Area Elevation Area

mrrVyear erf/year nf/year nf/year rrrVyear nf/year nf/year m m m3 rrf

1979 714 62272 2077018 41587 198925 2296627 1982285 1979 148.7 148.7 87167 7268399 1980 697 60729 2025557 47323 198925 2237889 4220174 1980 168.0 127273 7228293 1981 592 75282 1710214 69097 198925 1915325 6135499 181.0 163115 7192451 1982 833 135826 2395662 88555 198925 2641857 8777356 196.0 203348 7152218 1983 800 162638 2288138 110398 198925 2539303 11316659 208.0 222649 7132917 1984 733 163135 2090515 120876 198925 2331699 13648358 217.0 248280 7107286 1985 945 234501 2685132 134791 198925 2983767 16632125 228.0 312463 7043103 1986 664 207569 1871493 169636 198925 2108351 18740476 232.6 234.0 349263 7006303 1987 699 244065 1958402 189615 198925 2211777 20952253 240.0 383755 6971811 1988 764 293144 2130257 208341 198925 2413985 23366238 242.6 246.0 419438 6936128 1989 643 269815 1784746 227713 198925 2025774 25392012 247.8 251.0 450529 6905037 1990 654 294802 1807315 244592 198925 2056450 27448462 258.3 255.0 479777 6875789 1991 830 398078 2281978 260471 198925 2618510 30066972 257.5 260.0 516338 6839228 1992 872 450063 2384553 280320 198925 2753222 32820193 266.0 563107 6792459 1993 711 400220 1931056 305711 198925 2224491 35044684 267.9 269.0 586492 6769074 1994 765 448579 2070934 318406 198925 2400031 37444715 273.0 633192 6722374 1995 795 503388 2137715 343760 198925 2496268 39940983 277.0 685064 6670502 1996 1010 692051 2695417 371921 198925 3214472 43155454 281.6 281.0 740815 6614751 1997 578 428043 1528801 402189 198925 1753581 44909035 284.0 791359 6564207 1998 676 534563 1773649 429629 198925 2077508 46986543 286,0 825054 6530512 1999 813 671099 2124767 447922 198925 2546869 49533412 289.5 289.0 875598 6479968 2000 775 678676 2009049 475362 198925 2411288 51944701 291.4 292.0 944638 6410928 2001 941 888904 2413073 512844 198925 2988059 54932759 295.0 295.0 1022928 6332638 2002 732 748579 1853690 555348 198925 2245846 57178605 298.1 297.0 1075122 6280444 2003 842 905575 2116007 583684 198925 2636824 59815429 300.2 299.0 1127315 6228251 2004 868 978735 2162947 612019 198925 2728588 62544016 302.0 1208445 6147121 2005 905 1093642 2225258 656065 198925 2861761 65405777 304.0 1263476 6092090 2006 740 934972 1803259 685941 198925 2251215 67656992 306.0 1318507 6037059 2007 740 975695 1786969 715818 198925 2245772 69902764 306.9 307.0 1346023 6009543 2008 740 996057 1778825 730756 198925 2243051 72145815 309.3 309.0 1401054 5954512 2009 740 1036780 1762535 760632 198925 2237608 74383423 311.2 310.0 1428569 5926997 2010 740 1057141 1754391 775570 198925 2234887 76618310 312.8 312.0 1474314 5881252 2011 740 1090992 1740851 800405 198925 2230363 78848673 313.7 314.0 1520058 5835508 2012 740 1124843 1727310 825239 198925 2225839 81074512 315.0 1542929 5812637 2013 740 1141768 1720540 837656 198925 2223577 83298089 316.0 1565801 5789765 2014 740 1158693 1713770 850073 198925 2221315 85519404 318.0 1611545 5744021 2015 740 1192543 1700230 874908 198925 2216791 87736194 319.0 1634417 5721149 2016 740 1209468 1693460 887325 198925 2214529 89950723 320.0 1657287 5698279 2017 740 1226392 1686691 899741 198925 2212267 92162990 322.0 1702942 5652624 2018 740 1260177 1673177 924527 198925 2207752 94370741 323.0 1725770 5629796 2019 740 1277070 1666420 936921 198925 2205494 96576235 324.0 1748598 5606968 2020 740 1293963 1659662 949314 198925 2203236 98779471 326.0 1794255 5561311 2021 740 1327749 1646148 974101 198925 2198721 100978192 327.0 1817083 5538483 2022 740 1344642 1639391 986494 198925 2196463 103174655 328.0 1839911 5515655 2023 740 1361534 1632634 998888 198925 2194205 105368860 329.0 1862740 5492826 2024 740 1378427 1625877 1011281 198925 2191948 107560808 330.0 1885570 5469996 2025 740 1395321 1619119 1023676 198925 2189690 109750498 331.0 1909489 5446077 2026 740 1413022 1612039 1036662 198925 2187324 111937822 333.0 1957326 5398240 2027 740 1448421 1597879 1062632 198925 2182593 114120415 334.0 1981245 5374321 2028 740 1466121 1590799 1075618 198925 2180227 116300642 335.0 2005163 5350403 2029 740 1483821 1583719 1088603 198925 2177862 118478504 336.0 2029082 5326484 2030 740 1501520 1576639 1101588 198925 2175496 120654001 337.0 2053000 5302566 2031 740 1519220 1569560 1114574 198925 2173131 122827131 338.0 2076918 5278648 2032 740 1536920 1562480 1127559 198925 2170765 124997897 339.0 2100837 5254729 2033 740 1554619 1555400 1140544 198925 2168400 127166296 340.0 2124754 5230812 2034 740 1572318 1548320 1153529 198925 2166034 129332331 341.0 2145944 5209622 740 1587999 1542048 1165033 198925 2163939 131496269 342.0 740 1603680 1535775 1176538 198925 2161843 133658112 343.0 740 1619362 1529503 1188043 198925 2159747 135817859 344.0 740 1635043 1523230 1199547 198925 2157651 137975510 345.0 740 1650725 1516958 1211052 198925 2155555 140131066 346.0 740 1666407 1510685 1222557 198925 2153460 142284525 347.0 2041 740 1682088 1504412 1234062 198925 2151364 144435889 348.0 2042 740 1697770 1498140 1245566 198925 2149268 146585157 349.0 2043 740 1713451 1491867 1257071 198925 2147172 148732329 350.0 2044 740 1729134 1485594 1268577 198925 2145076 150877405 351.0 2045 740 1745996 1478849 1280947 198925 2142823 153020228 351.0 2046 740 1745996 1478849 1280947 198925 2142823 155163050 352.0 2047 740 1762858 1472104 1293319 198925 2140569 157303619 353.0 2048 740 1779721 1465359 1305690 198925 2138315 159441935 354.0 2049 740 1796584 1458614 1318061 198925 2136062 161577996 355.0 2050 740 1813446 1451869 1330432 198925 2133808 163711804 356.0 2051 740 1830309 1445124 1342804 198925 2131554 165843358 357.0 2052 740 1847172 1438379 1355175 198925 2129301 167972659 358.0 2053 740 1864035 1431634 1367546 198925 2127047 170099706 358.0 2054 740 1864035 1431634 1367546 198925 2127047 172226752 359.0 2055 740 1880897 1424889 1379918 198925 2124793 174351546 360.0 2056 740 1897761 1418143 1392290 198925 2122539 176474085 361.0 2057 740 1913904 1411686 1404133 198925 2120382 178594467 362.0 2058 740 1930047 8688275 1415976 198925 9401271 187995738 365.0 2059 740 1978475 8668904 1451506 198925 9394799 197390536 369.0 2060 740 2043047 8643075 1498879 198925 9386169 206776705 372.0 2061 740 2092471 8623306 1535138 198925 9379563 216156268 375.0 2062 740 2142392 8603337 1571763 198925 9372891 225529159 378.0 2063 740 2192313 8583369 1608388 198925 9366219 234895379 381.0 2064 740 2909954 8296313 2134884 198925 9270308 244165686 383.0 2065 740 4278675 7748824 3139044 198925 9087380 253253066 384.0 2066 740 4963035 7475080 3641124 198925 8995916 262248983 385.0 2067 740 5647396 7201336 4143204 198925 8904452 271153435 386.0 2068 740 6331756 6927592 4645284 198925 8812988 279966423 387.0 2069 740 7016116 6653848 5147364 198925 8721525 288687948 388.0 2070 740 7700477 6380103 5649444 198925 8630061 297318009 389.0 2071 740 8384837 6106359 6151525 198925 8538597 305856606 390.0 2072 740 9069197 5832615 6653604 198925 8447133 314303739 390.0 2073 740 9069197 5832615 6653604 198925 8447133 322750872 391.0 2074 740 9278988 5748699 6807517 198925 8419095 331169967 392.0 2075 740 9488780 5664782 6961430 198925 8391057 339561023 392.0 2076 740 9488780 5664782 6961430 198925 8391057 347952080 393.0 2077 740 9698571 5580866 7115343 198925 8363018 356315098 394.0 Annual D ((ri( D (tl , Rt ~ ~ Change in Accu. Water Year _ ..... Runoff Rt Runoff Land _ . Gwi-Gwo , Year Water R"ecipitation Evaporation4 Storage (/Volume Elevation Elevation

mnVyear nf/year nf/year nf/year nf/year nf/year nf/year m m

1979 714 1980 697 1981 592 1982 833 1983 800 1984 733 1985 945 1986 664 471679 4284704 338759 198925 4616549 36703368 231.3 231.3 1987 699 496175 4507228 385480 198925 4816848 41520215 237.0 1988 764 588847 4908421 418500 198925 5277692 46797908 238.3 243.0 1989 643 539591 4115984 455392 198925 4399108 51197016 244.4 248.0 1990 654 589761 4170445 489314 198925 4469817 55666833 252.1 253.0 1991 830 802768 5266167 525268 198925 5742592 61409425 255.7 259.0 1992 872 915212 5503549 570035 198925 6047651 67457076 264.0 1993 711 798178 4466799 609693 198925 4854208 72311284 264.9 269.0 1994 765 915652 4784223 649940 198925 5248860 77560144 273.0 1995 795 1012681 4948433 691553 198925 5468486 83028630 277.0 1996 1010 1370080 6254624 736306 198925 7087323 90115953 280.1 282.0 1997 578 841878 3554136 791027 198925 3803912 93919865 284.0 1998 676 1010554 4144575 812183 198925 4541870 98461735 287.0 1999 813 1264399 4971651 843917 198925 5591058 104052793 288.9 291.0 2000 775 1287346 4704561 901690 198925 5289142 109341935 291.4 294.0 2001 941 1698282 5657352 979806 198925 6574753 115916688 295.6 297.0 2002 732 1426021 4357510 1057921 198925 4924535 120841223 299.9 300.0 2003 842 1762542 4967005 1136037 198925 5792435 126633658 302.0 302.0 2004 868 1874806 5096510 1172347 198925 5997893 132631552 305.0 2005 905 2045065 5276216 1226813 198925 6293393 138924945 308.0 2006 740 1746447 4284558 1281279 198925 4948652 143873597 310.0 2007 740 1795940 4264761 1317589 198925 4942037 148815634 310.9 312.0 2008 740 1854034 4241524 1360210 198925 4934273 153749907 313.6 314.0 2009 740 1912128 4218286 1402830 198925 4926509 158676416 316.1 316.0 2010 740 1970221 4195049 1445450 198925 4918745 163595161 317.9 318.0 2011 740 2028315 4171811 1488070 198925 4910981 168506141 318.9 319.0 2012 740 2057361 4160193 1509380 198925 4907099 173413240 321.0 2013 740 2116982 4136344 1553121 198925 4899130 178312370 323.0 2014 740 2178128 4111886 1597981 198925 4890958 183203329 324.0 2015 740 2208702 6399566 1620411 198925 7186782 190390110 327.0 2016 740 2300421 6362878 1687701 198925 7174523 197564634 329.0 2017 740 2361568 6338419 1732561 198925 7166351 204730985 331.0 2018 740 2434178 6309375 1785831 198925 7156647 211887632 333.0 2019 740 2518256 6275744 1847515 198925 7145410 219033042 335.0 2020 740 2602334 6242113 1909199 198925 7134173 226167215 337.0 2021 740 2686412 6208482 1970882 198925 7122936 233290151 339.0 2022 740 2770489 6174851 2032566 198925 7111699 240401851 341.0 2023 740 2873263 6133742 2107965 198925 7097964 247499815 343.0 2024 740 2994729 6085155 2197079 198925 7081730 254581545 344.0 2025 740 3055463 6060861 2241636 198925 7073613 261655158 346.0 2026 740 3176930 6012275 2330750 198925 7057379 268712537 348.0 2027 740 3298397 5963688 2419864 198925 7041145 275753682 349.0 2028 740 3359130 5939394 2464421 198925 7033028 282786710 351.0 2029 740 3457063 5900221 2536270 198925 7019940 289806650 352.0 2030 740 3494262 5885342 2563561 198925 7014968 296821618 354.0 2031 740 3568661 5855582 2618143 198925 7005025 303826643 355.0 2032 740 3605860 5840702 2645434 198925 7000053 310826696 357.0 2033 740 3680259 5810943 2700017 198925 6990110 317816806 358.0 2034 740 3717458 5796063 2727308 198925 6985138 324801945 359.0 740 3754657 5781184 2754599 198925 6980167 331782111 361.0 740 3824491 5753250 2805833 198925 6970833 338752945 362.0 740 3857126 5740196 2829775 198925 6966472 345719417 363.0 740 3889760 5727142 2853718 198925 6962110 352681527 365.0 740 3955030 5701035 2901602 198925 6953387 359634914 366.0 740 3987665 5687981 2925545 198925 6949026 366583940 367.0 2041 740 4020299 5674927 2949487 198925 6944664 373528604 369.0 2042 740 4085569 5648819 2997372 198925 6935941 380464545 370.0 2043 740 4118204 5635765 3021315 198925 6931579 387396124 371.0 2044 740 4216564 5596421 3093476 198925 6918433 394314557 372.0 2045 740 4314925 5557077 3165639 198925 6905288 401219845 373.0 2046 740 4413285 5517732 3237801 198925 6892142 408111987 374.0 2047 740 4511646 5478388 3309963 198925 6878996 414990983 376.0 2048 740 4708368 5399699 3454288 198925 6852705 421843687 377.0 2049 740 4806728 5360355 3526450 198925 6839559 428683246 378.0 2050 740 4905089 5321011 3598612 198925 6826413 435509659 379.0 2051 740 5003450 5281667 3670774 198925 6813267 442322927 380.0 2052 740 5101811 5242322 3742937 198925 6800121 449123048 381.0 2053 740 5498550 5083627 4034004 198925 6747098 455870146 381.0 2054 740 5498550 5083627 4034004 198925 6747098 462617243 382.0 2055 740 5895288 4924931 4325070 198925 6694074 469311318 383.0 2056 740 6292027 4766236 4616137 198925 6641051 475952368 384.0 2057 740 6688766 4607540 4907204 198925 6588027 482540395 385.0 2058 740 7085504 4448845 5198271 198925 6535003 0 385.0 2059 740 7085504 4448845 5198271 198925 6535003 0 385.0 2060 740 7085504 4448845 5198271 198925 6535003 0 385.0 2061 740 7085504 4448845 5198271 198925 6535003 0 385.0 2062 740 7085504 4448845 5198271 198925 6535003 0 385.0 2063 740 7085504 4448845 5198271 198925 6535003 0 385.0 2064 740 7085504 4448845 5198271 198925 6535003 0 385.0 2065 740 7085504 4448845 5198271 198925 6535003 0 385.0 2066 740 7085504 4448845 5198271 198925 6535003 0 385.0 2067 740 7085504 4448845 5198271 198925 6535003 0 385.0 2068 740 7085504 4448845 5198271 198925 6535003 0 385.0 2069 740 7085504 4448845 5198271 198925 6535003 0 385.0 2070 740 7085504 4448845 5198271 198925 6535003 0 385.0 2071 740 7085504 4448845 5198271 198925 6535003 0 385.0 2072 740 7085504 4448845 5198271 198925 6535003 0 385.0 2073 740 7085504 4448845 5198271 198925 6535003 0 385.0 2074 740 7085504 4448845 5198271 198925 6535003 0 385.0 2075 740 7085504 4448845 5198271 198925 6535003 0 385.0 2076 740 7085504 4448845 5198271 198925 6535003 0 385.0 2077 740 7085504 4448845 5198271 198925 6535003 0 385.0 APPENDIX VII Example DYRESM Input Files <#5> ! DYRESM configuration file: Hogarth 1991145 # Simulation start day 158 # Simulation length (unit=days) .FALSE. # Run CAEDYM (.TRUE, or .FALSE.) 1 # Output Interval (in days, or -9999 for every time step) 0.82 # Light extinction coefficient (m-1) 0.5 # Min layer thickness (m) 250 # Max layer thickness (m) 10800 # Time Step (s) 3 # Number of Output Selections SALINITY TEMPTURE DENSITY # List of Output Selections .FALSE. # Activate destrat system (.TRUE, or .FALSE.) .FALSE. # Activate non-neutral atmospheric stability (.TRUE, or .FALSE.) <#3> Comment line: Hogarth Morphometry (3Hv2) +48 # latitude 390.0 # height above MSL 3 # number of inflows SURF 74.7 85.0 0.016 Inflow 1 # entry height, 1/2-angle, slope, drag coeff, name 100.0 74.7 10.0 0.016 Grdwat # entry height, 1/2-angle, slope, drag coeff, name SURF 74.7 10.0 0.016 FROMCAL # entry height, 1/2-angle, slope, drag coeff, 107.0 # zero-ht elevation (i.e., bottom elev.) 397.0 # crest elevation [m] 1I # number of outlets 394.0 # outlet heights 25 # number of stg survey points after header line Elevfm] SurfArea |[m A2J 107 11148 137 65030 168 127273 198 209025 200 203285 210 227493 220 257195 230 326279 240 383765 250 443218 260 516338 270 594288 280 723967 290 892445 300 1153413 310 1428569 320 1657287 330 1885570 340 2124754 350 2336667 360 2564542 370 2782689 380 3007558 390 12255672 400 15090689 Initial profile: Spring 1991145 - Adjusted for Scenario 3 184 # number of initial profile { Height (m) T (Cel) S (pss) 121.5 4.75 1.1465 122.1 4.75 1.2661 122.9 4.75 1.5673 123.3 4.75 1.7433 123.9 4.71 2.0966 125.7 4.7 2.1108 126.3 4.7 2.1117 127.4 4.7 2.1126 127.5 4.7 2.1108 128.2 4.7 2.1055 129.1 4.69 2.1115 130.1 4.69 2.1124 130.8 4.69 2.1080 131.6 4.69 2.1116 132.7 4.69 2.1125 133.7 4.69 2.1153 135.0 4.69 2.1126 136.2 4.69 2.1127 137.2 4.69 2.1127 137.8 4.69 2.1109 138.7 4.69 2.1092 139.8 4.69 2.1119 140.6 4.69 2.1111 141.3 4.68 2.1126 142.6 4.68 2.1090 144.0 4.69 2.1130 145.0 4.68 2.1154 145.8 4.69 2.1077 146.8 4.69 2.1095 147.3 4.68 2.1128 148.7 4.69 2.1114 149.5 4.68 2.1147 150.3 4.68 2.1120 151.3 4.69 2.1124 152.3 4.69 2.1124 153.2 4.69 2.1133 154.2 4.69 2.1134 155.2 4.69 2.1134 156.0 4.69 2.1090 157.0 4.69 2.1153 157.9 4.69 2.1117 159.0 4.69 2.1127 159.7 4.69 2.1118 160.5 4.69 2.1136 161.4 4.69 2.1101 162.4 4.69 2.1128 163.1 4.69 2.1092 163.9 4,69 2.1084 164.7 4.69 2.1120 165.9 4.69 2.1102 166.9 4.69 2.1103 167.6 4.69 2.1094 168.6 4.69 2.1103 169.6 4.68 2.1137 170.6 4.69 2.1194 171.5 4.69 2.1168 172.3 4.68 2.1129 173.3 4.69 2.1132 174.1 4.68 2.1094 174.9 4.69 2.1097 175.8 4.68 2.1085 176.4 4.69 2.1025 177.5 4.69 2.1206 178.3 4.69 2.1089 179.1 4.69 2.1081 180.1 4.69 2.1072 180.9 4.69 2.1054 181.9 4.69 2.1181 182.8 4.69 2.1127 183.6 4.69 2.1100 184.4 4.69 2.1128 185.1 4.68 2.1134 185.9 4.69 2.1110 186.0 4.68 2.1053 186.8 4.68 2.1054 187.7 4.68 2.1099 188.5 4.68 2.1180 188.5 4.68 2.1144 189.3 4.69 2.1112 190.2 4.69 2.1112 191.1 4.69 2.1112 192.0 4.68 2.1137 192.7 4.68 2.1191 193.5 4.68 2.1173 194.5 4.69 2.1105 195.2 4.68 2.1039 195.9 4.68 2.1075 196.6 4.68 2.1066 197.2 4.68 2.1148 198.1 4.68 2.1130 198.6 4.68 2.1139 199.0 4.68 2.1076 199.8 4.68 2.1095 200.6 4.68 2.1032 201.4 4.69 2.1170 202.2 4.68 2.1033 203.0 4.68 2.0988 203.7 4.68 2.1087 204.3 4.68 2.1123 205.1 4.68 2.1106 205.9 4.68 2.1142 206.7 4.68 2.1179 207.6 4.68 2.1098 208.2 4.68 2.1116 209.0 4.68 2.1098 209.7 4.68 2.1081 210.3 4.68 2.1099 211.0 4.68 2.1099 211.8 4.68 2.1099 212.6 4.68 2.1082 213.5 4.68 2.1046 214.3 4.68 2.1100 215.1 4.68 2.1110 216.0 4.68 2.1101 216.8 4.68 2.1101 217.7 4.68 2.1102 219.1 4.68 2.1084 220.1 4.68 2.1139 220.9 4.68 2.1157 221.7 4.68 2.1103 222.6 4.67 2.1074 224.1 4.67 2.1128 225.4 4.67 2.1093 226.2 4.68 2.1123 227.7 4.67 2.1112 228.6 4.67 2.1049 229.5 4.67 2.1157 231.0 4.67 2.1113 231.8 4.67 2.1167 233.2 4.67 2.1042 234.1 4.67 2.1069 235.3 4.67 2.1070 235.4 4.67 2.1151 236.5 4.67 2.1079 237.7 4.67 2.1098 238.6 4.67 2.1125 239.6 4.67 2.1089 240.7 4.67 2.1081 241.8 4.67 2.1081 243.1 4.67 2.1073 244.4 4.67 2.1118 245.3 4.66 2.1098 246.4 4.66 2.1098 247.3 4.66 2.1089 248.6 4.66 2.1081 249.6 4.67 2.1093 250.5 4.67 2.1085 251.5 4.67 2.1094 252.7 4.68 2.1079 253.8 4.68 2.1044 254.7 4.68 2.1053 255.4 4.68 2.1017 256.2 4.69 2.1057 257.1 4.7 2.0979 257.8 4.71 2.0946 258.7 4.72 2.0967 259.6 4.72 2.1004 260.6 4.75 2.0932 261.8 4.76 2.0980 262.9 4.77 2.0930 264.3 4.8 2.1011 265.4 4.82 2.0936 266.5 4.85 2.0838 266.5 4.84 2.0880 267.7 4.88 2.0838 268.8 4.93 2.0871 269.8 4.94 2.0848 270.8 5 2.0803 271.2 5 2.0830 272.2 5 2.0804 273.2 4.85 2.0840 274.4 4.63 2.0775 275.6 4.21 2.0994 276.9 3.3 2.0803 278.2 2.44 2.1190 279.5 2.29 2.1151 280.9 2.03 2.1280 282.0 1.78 2.1442 283.2 1.5 2.1636 284.4 1.44 2.1726 285.2 1.41 2.1687 286.2 1.32 2.1827 287.2 0.3 2.2239 288.0 0.01 0.3547 <#3> Weather File: Hogarth 86400 if met data input time step (seconds) CLOUDCOVER # longwave radiation type (NETT LW, INCIDENTALW. CLOUD COVER) FIXEDHT 290.3 # sensor type (FLOATING, FIXEDHT), height in metres (above water surface, above lake bottom) JulDay SW [W/m2] Cloud-Cover [%] AIR TEMP [C] VAP PRESS [mb] Wind Speed [m/s] Rain [m] 1991145 349.06 0.41 16.90 12.78 1.32 0 1991146 306.40 0.16 16.30 11.76 0.88 0 1991147 321.47 0.32 18.80 13.78 0.54 0 1991148 315.19 0.28 20.10 14.04 1.18 0 1991149 289.65 0.17 21.80 15.61 1.36 0 1991150 122.59 0.57 21.90 15.43 3.22 0 1991151 169.03 0.94 12.10 11.38 2.95 0.003 1991152 167.67 0.57 8.00 7.21 2.30 0 1991153 355.76 0.53 8.70 9.19 2.21 0.0018 1991154 169.03 0.92 16.60 13.98 3.61 0.0062 1991155 126.39 0.55 9.40 7.33 1.94 0 1991156 284.03 0.45 9.30 6.92 1.24 0 1991157 327.12 0.66 13.40 8.04 2.41 0 1991158 327.12 0.66 17.50 13.05 4.14 0.0084 1991159 165.90 0.15 6.30 4.99 3.18 0 1991160 342.86 0.55 14.80 10.36 1.63 0 1991161 94.02 0.85 15.60 12.42 1.84 0.01 1991162 321.32 0.87 10.30 10.58 2.69 0.0002 1991163 335.31 0.23 13.80 11.78 3.48 0 1991164 178.83 0.24 12.80 8.75 2.77 0.001 1991165 206.15 0.45 11.70 9.14 2.59 0 1991166 178.85 0.85 11.90 12.83 0.78 0.023 1991167 107.43 0.46 8.80 7.81 3.76 0.0004 1991168 258.31 0.10 10.80 8.53 1.59 0 1991169 307.72 0.44 17.10 12.69 0.88 0 1991170 263.56 0.32 20.10 13.82 2.08 0 1991171 358.55 0.63 17.50 12.97 2.88 0.0126 1991172 83.43 0.95 21.20 21.42 2.13 0.0002 1991173 194.05 0.75 18.20 16.22 3.39 0.0394 1991174 80.20 0.65 10.50 9.57 3.29 0.0018 1991175 198.98 0.41 9.30 8.17 1.15 0 1991176 339.90 0.79 14.20 13.55 2.70 0.008 1991177 252.65 0.81 21.20 22.81 1.55 0.0274 1991178 101.85 0.51 17.60 13.51 2.21 0 1991179 186.64 0.35 15.10 11.32 2.51 0.0012 1991180 343.02 0.55 12.70 9.31 2.00 0 1991181 356.64 0.53 13.80 10.85 1.00 0 1991182 273.41 0.85 15.40 14.32 1.24 0.006 1991183 167.89 0.26 13.20 10.44 1.67 0 1991184 150.60 0.66 15.50 12.26 2.41 0 1991185 202.23 0.87 20.00 18.90 1.92 0.0018 1991186 259.48 0.94 21.30 21.94 2.96 0.0034 1991187 208.60 0.54 19.40 13.28 5.46 0 1991188 294.76 0.13 19.30 13.47 4.51 0 1991189 132.09 0.75 16.20 13.02 0.68 0 1991190 157.35 0.40 17.00 14.63 1.12 0.0004 1991191 126.33 0.74 14.20 13.01 1.59 0 1991192 279.02 0.99 15.10 11.23 2.81 0.002 1991193 242.66 1.00 12.70 12.85 3.47 0.0036 1991194 350.15 0.92 14.80 14.61 1.53 0.0016 1991195 341.93 0.44 14.90 13.37 1.37 0 1991196 316.11 0.56 18.50 16.76 1.23 0 1991197 259.26 0.93 19.30 19.53 0.76 0 1991198 275.45 0.98 22.80 25.06 2.26 0.001 1991199 233.47 0.65 25.10 23.08 1.38 0 1991200 138.58 0.63 21.30 17.10 1.97 0.0004 1991201 149.58 0.65 17.20 14.75 1.46 0.0026 1991202 314.12 0.58 16.60 13.50 2.26 0 1991203 253.83 0.33 18.90 15.46 1.41 0 1991204 318.90 0.74 20.30 19.60 2.65 0.003 1991205 234.76 0.74 22.70 19.28 3.29 0 1991206 117.95 0.30 17.20 12.66 1.89 0 1991207 327.97 0.55 16.90 12.83 1.63 0 1991208 285.36 0.83 17.80 15.70 0.91 0 1991209 172.53 0.59 18.10 15.50 1.15 0 1991210 305.43 0.52 19.60 15.60 1.00 0 1991211 297.95 0.74 18.70 14.51 2.33 0 1991212 341.93 0.40 15.10 12.05 2.81 0.0014 1991213 170.03 0.63 14.00 13.85 1.54 0.0104 1991214 125.59 0.85 14.60 13.97 1.82 0.0044 1991215 72.49 0.94 17.60 15.69 1.98 0 1991216 192.26 0.67 16.80 15.21 1.05 0.0008 1991217 128.33 0.77 17.70 16.38 0.79 0.0004 1991218 215.95 0.50 17.10 14.53 1.71 0 1991219 280.59 0.86 17.70 17.40 1.27 0.0034 1991220 289.85 0.68 18.10 15.59 2.29 0.0034 1991221 195.36 0.70 15.00 14.51 1.49 0.0004 1991222 80.19 0.75 12.60 9.84 3.11 0.0006 1991223 67.89 0.44 13.30 10.18 1.49 0 1991224 277.95 0.34 14.5 11 2 0 1991225 193.68 0.71 19.4 18 2 0.0002 1991226 134.24 1.00 17.2 17 1 0 1991227 216.97 0.52 19.7 17 1 0 1991228 201.04 0.69 19.2 12 3 0.0002 1991229 237.42 0.32 13 10 2 0 1991230 283.00 0.10 13.6 10 1 0 1991231 278.00 0.26 16.9 13 3 0 1991232 185.63 0.74 14 11 4 0.0088 1991233 209.65 0.13 11.3 9 1 0 1991234 217.99 0.90 9.1 10 2 0.011 1991235 65.23 0.42 13.1 12 2 0 1991236 231.03 0.61 11.6 10 2 0 1991237 270.31 0.81 16.7 15 3 0.0014 1991238 52.80 0.63 6.6 7 3 0 1991239 146.79 0.38 6 7 2 0.0004 1991240 211.22 0.62 9.6 8 2 0 1991241 176.76 0.55 11.6 9 2 0 1991242 104.94 0.18 14.4 12 2 0 1991243 226.05 0.79 19.7 18 1 0.0058 1991244 81.88 1.00 13.2 14 3 0.0052 1991245 219.97 1.00 10 11 3 0.0088 1991246 195.72 1.00 16.3 18 3 0.0176 1991247 44.92 0.69 13.1 12 4 0.0006 1991248 48.02 0.72 7.8 7 5 0.0002 1991249 63.01 0.65 4.6 6 2 0 1991250 228.19 0.46 7.4 7 3 0 1991251 147.81 0.38 7.7 6 3 0 1991252 149.46 0.81 9.6 9 1 0 1991253 45.57 0.98 13 12 1 0.0006 1991254 212.09 0.92 8.6 9 1 0.0008 1991255 151.66 0.54 9.1 10 3 0.0028 1991256 114.26 0.49 4.2 6 2 0 1991257 183.87 0.80 3.8 6 1 0 1991258 60.52 0.29 4.4 6 1 0 1991259 33.00 0.51 5.5 6 2 0.0002 1991260 79.20 1.00 9.2 11 2 0.0212 1991261 73.53 0.96 7.7 9 1 0 1991262 101.75 0.77 6.7 8 1 0 1991263 182.63 0.58 9.8 10 1 0 1991264 154.36 0.95 8.6 11 2 0.0236 1991265 33.43 0.73 13.7 13 3 0.0012 1991266 80.59 0.31 11.7 11 2 0 1991267 49.79 0.64 13.9 12 1 0 1991268 70.06 0.99 13.2 12 4 0.0016 1991269 145.44 1.00 12.1 13 4 0.0016 1991270 142.89 1.00 9.5 11 2 0.0008 1991271 76.74 1.00 9 10 1 0.0004 1991272 55.13 0.93 12.2 13 1 0.006 1991273 34.03 0.31 8.2 9 2 0 1991274 68.47 0.42 6.9 8 0 0 1991275 111.44 0.77 6.2 9 1 0.0184 1991276 20.24 0.85 3.5 6 3 0.0002 1991277 55.59 0.77 2.4 6 2 0.002 1991278 35.78 0.80 2.5 5 5 0.0004 1991279 120.21 0.79 0.1 5 2 0.0004 1991280 28.59 0.96 7.3 9 2 0.0094 1991281 104.46 0.64 3 4 3 0 1991282 112.77 0.23 -0.4 4 1 0 1991283 119.09 0.83 3.9 6 4 0.0041 1991284 27.09 1.00 4.6 7 2 0.0006 1991285 61.39 1.00 1.9 5 3 0 1991286 119.58 1.00 1.2 6 1 0.0064 1991287 20.44 1.00 2.1 6 2 0.0012 1991288 60.79 0.97 2.8 5 3 0 1991289 56.76 0.77 1 5 1 0 1991290 62.30 0.21 2.8 6 1 0 1991291 104.94 0.18 5.7 7 2 0 1991292 110.98 0.11 10 8 1 0 1991293 52.97 0.52 8.4 7 1 0 1991294 43.22 0.66 8.7 8 1 0 1991295 13.43 0.55 8.5 8 2 0 1991296 52.47 0.94 4.3 6 1 0 1991297 51.40 0.38 2.6 6 1 0 1991298 23.34 0.14 2.3 6 0 0 1991299 86.31 0.79 1 5 2 0 1991300 41.09 0.44 1 6 2 0 1991301 22.58 1.00 6.3 7 3 0 1991302 33.00 0.50 1 3 2 0 184 ws:3H #number of inflow streams wl # inflow 1 vat # inflow 2 MCAI # inflow 3 lyNum InfNum VOLUME TEMPTURE SALINITY 145 1 13416 16.90 1.3467 145 2 1713 3 0.4321 145 3 22821 16.5 0.3514 146 1 13416 16.30 1.3467 146 2 1713 3 0.4321 146 3 22821 18.9 0.3516 147 1 13416 18.80 1.3467 147 2 1713 3 0.4321 147 3 22821 21.0 0.3518 148 1 13416 20.10 1.3467 148 2 1713 3 0.4321 148 3 22821 23.1 0.3521 149 1 13416 21.80 1.3467 149 2 1713 3 0.4321 149 3 22821 24.5 0.3526 150 1 13416 21.90 1.3467 150 2 1713 3 0.4321 150 3 22821 24.0 0.3535 151 1 13416 12.10 1.3467 151 2 1713 3 0.4321 151 3 22821 21.9 0.3542 152 1 17426 8.00 1.3467 152 2 1713 3 0.4321 152 3 22821 19.0 0.3529 153 1 17426 8.70 1.3467 153 2 1713 3 0.4321 153 3 22821 18.9 0.3532 154 1 17426 16.60 1.3467 154 2 1713 3 0.4321 154 3 22821 19.2 0.3530 155 1 17426 9.40 1.3467 155 2 1713 3 0.4321 155 3 22821 18.8 0.3529 156 1 17426 9.30 1.3467 156 2 1713 3 0.4321 156 3 22821 17.9 0.3547 157 1 17426 13.40 1.3467 157 2 1713 3 0.4321 157 3 22821 18.7 0.3550 158 1 17426 17.50 1.3467 158 2 1713 3 0.4321 158 3 22821 18.5 0.3548 159 1 17426 6.30 1.3467 159 2 1713 3 0.4321 159 3 22821 18.4 0.3548 160 1 17426 14.80 1.3467 160 2 1713 3 0.4321 160 3 22821 18.6 0.3574 161 1 17426 15.60 1.3467 161 2 1713 3 0.4321 161 3 22821 19.0 0.3564 162 1 17426 10.30 1.3467 162 2 1713 3 0.4321 162 3 22821 19.0 0.3556 163 1 17426 13.80 1.3467 163 2 1713 3 0.4321 163 3 22821 18.3 0.3571 164 1 17426 12.80 1.3467 164 2 1713 3 0.4321 164 3 22821 18.3 0.3573 165 1 17426 11.70 1.3467 165 2 1713 3 0.4321 165 3 22821 18.2 0.3574 166 1 17426 11.90 1.3467 166 2 1713 3 0.4321 166 3 22821 18.5 0.3561 167 1 17426 8.80 1.3467 167 2 1713 3 0.4321 167 3 22821 17.9 0.3561 168 1 17426 10.80 1.3467 168 2 1713 3 0.4321 168 3 22821 17.6 0.3563 169 1 17426 17.10 1.3467 169 2 1713 3 0.4321 169 3 22821 19.1 0.3564 170 1 17426 20.10 1.3467 170 2 1713 3 0.4321 170 3 22821 20.7 0.3566 171 1 17426 17.50 1.3467 171 2 1713 3 0.4321 171 3 22821 21.9 0.3556 172 1 17426 21.20 1.3467 172 2 1713 3 0.4321 172 3 22821 22.3 0.3545 173 1 17426 18.20 1.3467 173 2 1713 3 0.4321 173 3 22821 22.0 0.3495 174 1 17426 10.50 1.3467 174 2 1713 3 0.4321 174 3 22821 19.1 0.3535 175 1 17426 9.30 1.3467 175 2 1713 3 0.4321 175 3 22821 18.7 0.3536 176 1 17426 14.20 1.3467 176 2 1713 3 0.4321 176 3 22821 19.6 0.3533 177 1 17426 21.20 1.3467 177 2 1713 3 0.4321 177 3 22821 21.5 0.3487 178 1 17426 17.60 1.3467 178 2 1713 3 0.4321 178 3 22821 21.6 0.3454 179 1 17426 15.10 1.3467 179 2 1713 3 0.4321 179 3 22821 20.3 0.3460 180 1 17426 12.70 1.3467 180 2 1713 3 0.4321 180 3 22821 20.3 0.3519 181 1 17426 13.80 1.3467 181 2 1713 3 0.4321 181 3 22821 21.7 0.3524 182 1 10386 15.40 1.3467 182 2 1713 3 0.4321 182 3 22821 23.0 0.3520 183 1 10386 13.20 1.3467 183 2 1713 3 0.4321 183 3 22821 22.5 0.3518 184 1 10386 15.50 1.3467 184 2 1713 3 0.4321 184 3 22821 21.0 0.3525 185 1 10386 20.00 1.3467 185 2 1713 3 0.4321 185 3 22821 21.3 0.3520 186 1 10386 21.30 1.3467 186 2 1713 3 0.4321 186 3 22821 22.9 0.3516 1991187 1 10386 19.40 1.3467 1991187 2 1713 3 0.4321 1991187 3 22821 21.5 0.3521 1991188 1 10386 19.30 1.3467 1991188 2 1713 3 0.4321 1991188 3 22821 21.4 0.3525 1991189 1 10386 16.20 1.3467 1991189 2 1713 3 0.4321 1991189 3 22821 21.5 0.3527 1991190 1 10386 17.00 1.3467 1991190 2 1713 3 0.4321 1991190 3 22821 21.5 0.3527 1991191 1 10386 14.20 1.3467 1991191 2 1713 3 0.4321 1991191 3 22821 21.4 0.3528 1991192 1 10386 15.10 1.3467 1991192 2 1713 3 0.4321 1991192 3 22821 21.5 0.3530 1991193 1 10386 12.70 1.3467 1991193 2 1713 3 0.4321 1991193 3 22821 21.5 0.3530 1991194 1 10386 14.80 1.3467 1991194 2 1713 3 0.4321 1991194 3 22821 21.9 0.3531 1991195 1 10386 14.90 1.3467 1991195 2 1713 3 0.4321 1991195 3 22821 23.1 0.3532 1991196 1 10386 18.50 1.3467 1991196 2 1713 3 0.4321 1991196 3 22821 24.4 0.3536 1991197 1 10386 19.30 1.3467 1991197 2 1713 3 0.4321 1991197 3 22821 25.9 0.3540 1991198 1 10386 22.80 1.3467 1991198 2 1713 3 0.4321 1991198 3 22821 27.4 0.3542 1991199 1 10386 25.10 1.3467 1991199 2 1713 3 0.4321 1991199 3 22821 28.4 0.3547 1991200 1 10386 21.30 1.3467 1991200 2 1713 3 0.4321 1991200 3 22821 27.7 0.3555 1991201 1 10386 17.20 1.3467 1991201 2 1713 3 0.4321 1991201 3 22821 26.0 0.3559 1991202 1 10386 16.60 1.3467 1991202 2 1713 3 0.4321 1991202 3 22821 24.9 0.3541 1991203 1 10386 18.90 1.3467 1991203 2 1713 3 0.4321 1991203 3 22821 24.9 0.3542 1991204 1 10386 20.30 1.3467 1991204 2 1713 3 0.4321 1991204 3 22821 25.7 0.3542 1991205 1 10386 22.70 1.3467 1991205 2 1713 3 0.4321 1991205 3 22821 25.6 0.3546 1991206 1 10386 17.20 1.3467 1991206 2 1713 3 0.4321 1991206 3 22821 24.9 0.3546 1991207 1 10386 16.90 1.3467 1991207 2 1713 3 0.4321 1991207 3 22821 24.9 0.3549 1991208 1 10386 17.80 1.3467 1991208 2 1713 3 0.4321 1991208 3 22821 26.1 0.3551 1991209 1 10386 18.10 1.3467 1991209 2 1713 3 0.4321 1991209 3 22821 26.2 0.3556 1991210 1 10386 19.60 1.3467 1991210 2 1713 3 0.4321 1991210 3 22821 26.6 0.3554 1991211 1 10386 18.70 1.3467 1991211 2 1713 3 0.4321 1991211 3 22821 26.9 0.3562 1991212 1 10386 15.10 1.3467 1991212 2 1713 3 0.4321 1991212 3 22821 26.4 0.3559 1991213 1 10375 14.00 1.3467 1991213 2 1713 3 0.4321 1991213 3 22821 25.8 0.3557 1991214 1 10375 14.60 1.3467 1991214 2 1713 3 0.4321 1991214 3 22821 25.4 0.3554 1991215 1 10375 17.60 1.3467 1991215 2 1713 3 0.4321 1991215 3 22821 24.9 0.3554 1991216 1 10375 16.80 1.3467 1991216 2 1713 3 0.4321 1991216 3 22821 24.7 0.3556 1991217 1 10375 17.70 1.3467 1991217 2 1713 3 0.4321 1991217 3 22821 24.7 0.3556 1991218 1 10375 17.10 1.3467 1991218 2 1713 3 0.4321 1991218 3 22821 24.9 0.3558 1991219 1 10375 17.70 1.3467 1991219 2 1713 3 0.4321 1991219 3 22821 25.6 0.3557 1991220 1 10375 18.10 1.3467 1991220 2 1713 3 0.4321 1991220 3 22821 25.9 0.3555 1991221 1 10375 15.00 1.3467 1991221 2 1713 3 0.4321 1991221 3 22821 25.4 0.3559 1991222 1 10375 12.60 1.3467 1991222 2 1713 3 0.4321 1991222 3 22821 24.5 0.3561 1991223 1 10375 13.30 1.3467 1991223 2 1713 3 0.4321 1991223 3 22821 23.5 0.3564 1991224 1 10375 14.5 1.3467 1991224 2 1713 3 0.4321 1991224 3 22821 23.1 0.3566 1991225 1 10375 19.4 1.3467 1991225 2 1713 3 0.4321 1991225 3 22821 23.2 0.3568 1991226 1 10375 17.2 1.3467 1991226 2 1713 3 0.4321 1991226 3 22821 23.6 0.3569 1991227 1 10375 19.7 1.3467 1991227 2 1713 3 0.4321 1991227 3 22821 24.0 0.3570 1991228 1 10375 19.2 1.3467 1991228 2 1713 3 0.4321 1991228 3 22821 23.6 0.3572 1991229 1 10375 13 1.3467 1991229 2 1713 3 0.4321 1991229 3 22821 23.4 0.3575 1991230 1 10375 13.6 1.3467 1991230 2 1713 3 0.4321 1991230 3 22821 23.9 0.3578 1991231 1 10375 16.9 1.3467 1991231 2 1713 3 0.4321 1991231 3 22821 23.5 0.3580 1991232 1 10375 14 1.3467 1991232 2 1713 3 0.4321 1991232 3 22821 23.1 0.3580 1991233 1 10375 11.3 1.3467 1991233 2 1713 3 0.4321 1991233 3 22821 22.6 0.3580 1991234 1 10375 9.1 1.3467 1991234 2 1713 3 0.4321 1991234 3 22821 22.4 0.3578 1991235 1 10375 13.1 1.3467 1991235 2 1713 3 0.4321 1991235 3 22821 21.9 0.3576 1991236 1 10375 11.6 1.3467 1991236 2 1713 3 0.4321 1991236 3 22821 21.5 0.3578 1991237 1 10375 16.7 1.3467 1991237 2 1713 3 0.4321 1991237 3 22821 21.6 0.3579 1991238 1 10375 6.6 1.3467 1991238 2 1713 3 0.4321 1991238 3 22821 21.0 0.3582 1991239 1 10375 6 1.3467 1991239 2 1713 3 0.4321 1991239 3 22821 19.9 0.3585 1991240 1 10375 9.6 1.3467 1991240 2 1713 3 0.4321 1991240 3 22821 19.5 0.3587 1991241 1 10375 11.6 1.3467 1991241 2 1713 3 0.4321 1991241 3 22821 19.3 0.3589 1991242 1 10375 14.4 1.3467 1991242 2 1713 3 0.4321 1991242 3 22821 19.0 0.3591 1991243 1 10375 19.7 1.3467 1991243 2 1713 3 0.4321 1991243 3 22821 19.2 0.3590 1991244 1 10042 13.2 1.3467 1991244 2 1713 3 0.4321 1991244 3 22821 19.4 0.3586 1991245 1 10042 10 1.3467 1991245 2 1713 3 0.4321 1991245 3 22821 19.1 0.3583 1991246 1 10042 16.3 1.3467 1991246 2 1713 3 0.4321 1991246 3 22821 19.3 0.3574 1991247 1 10042 13.1 1.3467 1991247 2 1713 3 0.4321 1991247 3 22821 19.0 0.3568 1991248 1 10042 7.8 1.3467 1991248 2 1713 3 0.4321 1991248 3 22821 17.2 0.3632 1991249 1 10042 4.6 1.3467 1991249 2 1713 3 0.4321 1991249 3 22821 16.4 0.3634 1991250 1 10042 7.4 1.3467 1991250 2 1713 3 0.4321 1991250 3 22821 16.0 0.3635 1991251 1 10042 7.7 1.3467 1991251 2 1713 3 0.4321 1991251 3 22821 15.7 0.3637 1991252 1 10042 9.6 1.3467 1991252 2 1713 3 0.4321 1991252 3 22821 15.6 0.3639 1991253 1 10042 13 1.3467 1991253 2 1713 3 0.4321

1991253 3 22821 15.5 0.3639 1991254 1 10042 8.6 1.3467 1991254 2 1713 3 0.4321 1991254 3 22821 15.6 0.3639 1991255 1 10042 9.1 1.3467 1991255 2 1713 3 0.4321 1991255 3 22821 15.7 0.3639 1991256 1 10042 4.2 1.3467 1991256 2 1713 3 0.4321 1991256 3 22821 15.3 0.3639 1991257 1 10042 3.8 1.3467 1991257 2 1713 3 0.4321 1991257 3 22821 15.1 0.3640 1991258 1 10042 4.4 1.3467 1991258 2 1713 3 0.4321 1991258 3 22821 14.9 0.3641 1991259 1 10042 5.5 1.3467 1991259 2 1713 3 0.4321 1991259 3 22821 14.4 0.3641 1991260 1 10042 9.2 1.3467 1991260 2 1713 3 0.4321 1991260 3 22821 14.0 0.3636 1991261 1 10042 7.7 1.3467 1991261 2 1713 3 0.4321 1991261 3 22821 13.9 0.3630 1991262 1 10042 6.7 1.3467 1991262 2 1713 3 0.4321 1991262 3 22821 13.7 0.3630 1991263 1 10042 9.8 1.3467 1991263 2 1713 3 0.4321 1991263 3 22821 13.8 0.3631 1991264 1 10042 8.6 1.3467 1991264 2 1713 3 0.4321 1991264 3 22821 14.2 0.3617 1991265 1 10042 13.7 1.3467 1991265 2 1713 3 0.4321 1991265 3 22821 13.8 0.3617 1991266 1 10042 11.7 1.3467 1991266 2 1713 3 0.4321 1991266 3 22821 13.7 0.3617 1991267 1 10042 13.9 1.3467 1991267 2 1713 3 0.4321 1991267 3 22821 13.5 0.3617 1991268 1 10042 13.2 1.3467 1991268 2 1713 3 0.4321 1991268 3 22821 13.5 0.3617 1991269 1 10042 12.1 1.3467 1991269 2 1713 3 0.4321 1991269 3 22821 13.6 0.3616 1991270 1 10042 9.5 1.3467 1991270 2 1713 3 0.4321 1991270 3 22821 13.2 0.3693 1991271 1 10042 9 1.3467 1991271 2 1713 3 0.4321 1991271 3 22821 13.2 0.3693 1991272 1 10042 12.2 1.3467 1991272 2 1713 3 0.4321 1991272 3 22821 13.2 0.3691 1991273 1 10042 8.2 1.3467 1991273 2 1713 3 0.4321 1991273 3 22821 13.0 0.3690 1991274 1 7256 6.9 1.3467 1991274 2 1713 3 0.4321 1991274 3 22821 12.7 0.3690 1991275 1 7256 6.2 1.3467 1991275 2 1713 3 0.4321 1991275 3 22821 12.6 0.3685 1991276 1 7256 3.5 1.3467 1991276 2 1713 3 0.4321 1991276 3 22821 12.3 0.3681 1991277 1 7256 2.4 1.3467 1991277 2 1713 3 0.4321 1991277 3 22821 11.8 0.3682 1991278 1 7256 2.5 1.3467 1991278 2 1713 3 0.4321 1991278 3 22821 11.2 0.3682 1991279 1 7256 0.1 1.3467 1991279 2 1713 3 0.4321 1991279 3 22821 10.4 0.3782 1991280 1 7256 7.3 1.3467 1991280 2 1713 3 0.4321 1991280 3 22821 10.0 0.3777 1991281 1 7256 3 1.3467 1991281 2 1713 3 0.4321 1991281 3 22821 9.9 0.3778 1991282 1 7256 -0.4 1.3467 1991282 2 1713 3 0.4321 1991282 3 22821 9.6 0.3779 1991283 1 7256 3.9 1.3467 1991283 2 1713 3 0.4321 1991283 3 22821 9.4 0.3779 1991284 1 7256 4.6 1.3467 1991284 2 1713 3 0.4321 1991284 3 22821 9.2 0.3778 1991285 1 7256 1.9 1.3467 1991285 2 1713 3 0.4321 1991285 3 22821 9.0 0.3779 1991286 1 7256 1.2 1.3467 1991286 2 1713 3 0.4321 1991286 3 22821 8.8 0.3778 1991287 1 7256 2.1 1.3467 1991287 2 1713 3 0.4321 1991287 3 22821 8.6 0.3776 1991288 1 7256 2.8 1.3467 1991288 2 1713 3 0.4321 1991288 3 22821 8.4 0.3776 1991289 1 7256 1 1.3467 1991289 2 1713 3 0.4321 1991289 3 22821 8.1 0.3777 1991290 1 7256 2.8 1.3467 1991290 2 1713 3 0.4321 1991290 3 22821 7.9 0.3777 1991291 1 7256 5.7 1.3467 1991291 2 1713 3 0.4321 1991291 3 22821 7.8 0.3777 1991292 1 7256 10 1.3467 1991292 2 1713 3 0.4321 1991292 3 22821 8.1 0.3777 1991293 1 7256 8.4 1.3467 1991293 2 1713 3 0.4321 1991293 3 22821 7.8 0.3778 1991294 1 7256 8.7 1.3467 1991294 2 1713 3 0.4321 1991294 3 22821 7.8 0.3777 1991295 1 7256 8.5 1.3467 1991295 2 1713 3 0.4321 1991295 3 22821 7.6 0.3777 1991296 1 7256 4.3 1.3467 1991296 2 1713 3 0.4321 1991296 3 22821 7.5 0.3777 1991297 1 7256 2.6 1.3467 1991297 2 1713 3 0.4321 1991297 3 22821 7.3 0.3777 1991298 1 7256 2.3 1.3467 1991298 2 1713 3 0.4321 1991298 3 22821 7.1 0.3777 1991299 1 7256 1 1.3467 1991299 2 1713 3 0.4321 1991299 3 22821 6.9 0.3777 1991300 1 7256 1 1.3467 1991300 2 1713 3 0.4321 1991300 3 22821 6.7 0.3777 1991301 1 7256 6.3 1.3467 1991301 2 1713 3 0.4321 1991301 3 22821 6.6 0.3778 1991302 1 7256 -4.3 1.3467 1991302 2 1713 3 0.4321 1991302 3 22821 6.3 0.3778 1991303 1 7256 -3.8 1.3467 1991303 2 1713 3 0.4321 1991303 3 22821 5.9 0.3778 1991304 1 7256 3.8 1.3467 1991304 2 1713 3 0.4321 1991304 3 22821 5.4 0.4044 192 Comment line: Hogarth Outflow Scenario 3 [mA3/day] 1 # number of withdrawal outlets Date TOWEST 1991145 91355 1991146 91355 1991147 91355 1991148 91355 1991149 91355 1991150 91355 1991151 91355 1991152 91355 1991153 91355 1991154 91355 1991155 91355 1991156 91355 1991157 91355 1991158 91355 1991159 91355 1991160 91355 1991161 91355 1991162 91355 1991163 91355 1991164 91355 1991165 91355 1991166 91355 1991167 91355 1991168 91355 1991169 91355 1991170 91355 1991171 91355 1991172 91355 1991173 91355 1991174 91355 1991175 91355 1991176 91355 1991177 91355 1991178 91355 1991179 91355 1991180 91355 1991181 91355 1991182 91355 1991183 91355 1991184 91355 1991185 91355 1991186 91355 1991187 91355 1991188 91355 1991189 91355 1991190 91355 1991191 91355 1991192 91355 1991193 91355 1991194 91355 1991195 91355 1991196 91355 1991197 91355 1991198 91355 1991199 91355 1991200 91355 1991201 91355 1991202 91355 1991203 91355 1991204 91355 1991205 91355 1991206 91355 1991207 91355 1991208 91355 1991209 91355 1991210 91355 1991211 91355 1991212 91355 1991213 91355 1991214 91355 1991215 91355 1991216 91355 1991217 91355 1991218 91355 1991219 91355 1991220 91355 1991221 91355 1991222 91355 1991223 91355 1991224 91355 1991225 91355 1991226 91355 1991227 91355 1991228 91355 1991229 91355 1991230 91355 1991231 91355 1991232 91355 1991233 91355 1991234 91355 1991235 91355 1991236 91355 1991237 91355 1991238 91355 1991239 91355 1991240 91355 1991241 91355 1991242 91355 1991243 91355 1991244 91355 1991245 91355 1991246 91355 1991247 91355 1991248 91355 1991249 91355 1991250 91355 1991251 91355 1991252 91355 1991253 91355 1991254 91355 1991255 91355 1991256 91355 1991257 91355 1991258 91355 1991259 91355 1991260 91355 1991261 91355 1991262 91355 1991263 91355 1991264 91355 1991265 91355 1991266 91355 1991267 91355 1991268 91355 1991269 91355 1991270 91355 1991271 91355 1991272 91355 1991273 91355 1991274 91355 1991275 91355 1991276 91355 1991277 91355 1991278 91355 1991279 91355 1991280 91355 1991281 91355 1991282 91355 1991283 91355 1991284 91355 1991285 91355 1991286 91355 1991287 91355 1991288 91355 1991289 91355 1991290 91355 1991291 91355 1991292 91355 1991293 91355 1991294 91355 1991295 91355 1991296 91355 1991297 91355 1991298 91355 1991299 91355 1991300 91355 1991301 91355 1991302 91355 195 <#7> Dyresm Parameters File for DYCD V4.0.0 1.3E-3 # bulk aerodynamic mmt. transport coeff. (priv. comm. [Imberger, 1998]) 0.08 # mean albedo of water 0.96 # emissivity of a water surface (Imberger & Patterson [1981,p316]) 3.00 # critical wind speed [m sA-l] 43200 # time of day for output (sees from midnight) (54000 s = 15:00 HR) 0.012 # bubbler entrainment coefficient (priv. comm. [Alexander.2000]) 0.083 # buoyant plume entrainment coefficient [Fischer et al. 1979] 0.06 # shear production efficiency (eta^K) 0.20 # potential energy mixing efficiency (eta_P) 0.4 # wind stirring efficiency (eta_S) 1.0E+7 # effective surf, area coeff. (priv. com. [Yeates,2002] 1.4E-5 # BBL detrainment diffusivity (priv, com. [Yeates,2002] 200 # vertical mix coeff. (priv. com. [Yeates,2002] APPENDIX VIII Glossary of Terms 197

Mixolimnion: The circulating upper stratum.

Monimolimnion: The deeper statum of water that is perennially or periodically isolated.

Chemilimnion: The interfacing stratum of steep salinity (density) gradient between the mixolimnion and the monimolimnion.

Epilimnion: An upper stratum of less dense more or less uniformly warm, circulating, and fairly turbulent water

Hypolimnion: The lower stratum of more dense, cooler, and relatively quiescent water lying below the epilimnion.

Metalimnion: The transitional stratum of marked thermal change between the epilimnion and the hypolimnion.